Re: [Engine-devel] REST-API: Exposing correlation-ID

On 05/29/2012 08:56 AM, Livnat Peer wrote: > On 28/05/12 21:31, Itamar Heim wrote: >> On 05/28/2012 02:35 PM, Ori Liel wrote: >>> Quite a few people liked flow-id, and no one objected to it >>> explicitly, so I'll just go with that. >>> >>> If someone feels strongly against, please reply. >> >> I still like 'label' better. >> it doesn't have the context of a unique id, and is much more correct to >> what this is - allows the user to label a command (or a set of >> commands). >> but also doesn't imply it's unique in any way (i.e., it's like a "tag", >> just a better, non overloaded term for it). >> > > I think that flow-id is confusing. This id has nothing to do with flow, > it can aggregate multiple commands and it is not associated with a > specific user flow. > > Correlation-Id is a common name for such Id, we took it from the > terminology used in JMS queues, but Microsoft and Oracle are using CID > too. > > * http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=23842 > * > http://sharepoint.microsoft.com/blogs/GetThePoint/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?I... > > * > http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B14099_19/integrate.1012/b25709/com/oracle/bpel... > but all of those conform to the concept of an "id" uniquely identifies the correlation. in our case, it is not unique, and just a label the user sets.