A Scheme to Specify and Implement Ad-Hoc Recovery in Workflow Systems

Pre-defining a business process can substantially simplify the process design and the implementation of run time support. However, requiring that all the instances of the business process follow a fixed pattern (even if conditions are allowed) does not offer users sufficient flexibility to make changes to the process structures. These changes may be necessary due to the occurrence of exceptions, or other ad-hoc events. Some exceptions/events may be predictable in advance, and therefore can be incorporated into the process definition. However, not all exception/events can be predicted at the process definition time. When this happens, no corresponding exception-specific provision can be incorporated. The design and implementation of the system support for unpredictable exception/event handling is therefore a more complicated issue. In this paper, we study a special case of changing the structure of a business process in the context of unpredictable exception/event, namely, redirecting the control flow at run time in an ad-hoc manner. This phenomenon is termed ad-hoc recovery. We concentrate on two aspects in supporting ad-hoc recovery, the kind of interface that should be used and the increased functionality that must be built into the workflow database. For the latter, we also suggest implementation strategies to maximize the performance.

[1]  Umeshwar Dayal,et al.  A Transactional Model for Long-Running Activities , 1991, VLDB.

[2]  Ahmed K. Elmagarmid,et al.  A Multidatabase Transaction Model for InterBase , 1990, VLDB.

[3]  Jian Tang,et al.  Handling uncertainties in workflow applications , 1996, CIKM '96.

[4]  Jacques Wainer,et al.  WorkFlow systems: a few definitions and a few suggestions , 1995, COCS '95.

[5]  C. Wargitsch,et al.  Dynamic change within workflow systems , 1995 .

[6]  Betty Salzberg,et al.  DSDT: Durable Scripts containing Database Transactions , 1996, Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Data Engineering.

[7]  Panos K. Chrysanthis,et al.  Synthesis of extended transaction models using ACTA , 1994, TODS.

[8]  Jian Tang,et al.  Enforcing Inter-Task Dependencies in Transactional Workflows , 1995, CoopIS.

[9]  Mark F. Hornick,et al.  A Framework for Enforceable Specification of Extended Transaction Models and Transaction Workflows , 1994, Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst..

[10]  Grzegorz Rozenberg,et al.  Dynamic change within workflow systems , 1995, COCS '95.

[11]  Matthias Nussbaum Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications , 1992 .

[12]  Gary J. Nutt,et al.  Supporting unstructured workflow activities in the Bramble ICN system , 1995, COCS '95.

[13]  Munindar P. Singh Synthesizing distributed constrained events from transactional workflow specifications , 1996, Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Data Engineering.

[14]  Jacques Wainer,et al.  Scientific Workflow Systems , 1996 .

[15]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  Specifying and Enforcing Intertask Dependencies , 1993, VLDB.