At 09:57 06/05/97 PDT, Harry Lewis wrote:
>I don't want to begin making the diagram too complex.
>>>> +--------->----------+------>------+--> canceled(7)
>>> | | |
>>> +---> pending(3) -------> processing(5) -------> completed(9)
>>> | ^ ^ \ |
>>> --->+ | | +------------> aborted(8)
>>> | v v / |
>>> +---> held(4) stopped(6) |
> | | |
> +--------->----------+------>------+
>>I only want to assure that the state diagram does not give the impression that,
>to cancel or abort a job, the flow has to be back through processing.
>>> +--> canceled(7)
>> /
>> +---> pending(3) ----> processing(5) -----+----> aborted(8)
>> | ^ ^ \
>>--->+ | | +--> completed(9)
>> | v |
>> +---> held(4) processing-stopped(6)
>>>What was wrong with my proposal?
>>> +--> canceled(7)
>> /
>> +---> pending(3) ----> processing(5) ---+-+----> aborted(8)
>> | ^ ^ | \
>>--->+ | | | +--> completed(9)
>> | v v |
>> +---> held(4) processing-stopped(6) |
>> | | |
>> +--------------------+---------+
>>>>>>> Harry <<<
>>
It shows state transitions that are very unlikely:
held -> aborted
held -> completed
processing-stopped -> completed
and it doesn't show pending -> canceled
Our website uses cookies on your device to give you the best user experience. By using our website, you agree to the placement of these cookies. To learn more, read our privacy policy. Read Privacy Policy