nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

register a TBO for dm_document

anis

i need to replace logic of deletion process for dm_document,So i deploy a TBO for dm_document.

After deploying the TBO ,the docbase becomes unusable crashing with java.lang.StackOverFlowError.

- can we deploy a TBO for a native type?

May be exists another solution to this!

Thanks in advance.

Find more posts tagged with

Note:

If there are Accepted Answers, those will be shown by default. You can switch to 'All Replies' by selecting the tab below.

Button

Accepted answers

CláudioGil

Wouldn't it be possible to attach an aspect to dm_document instead? You can override the behavior of destroy in the aspect implementation.

All comments

ukdavo

Why do you need to apply a TBO to dm_document? Most people tend to use sub-types of dm_document in order to separate business documents from system documents (e.g. log files, lifecycle notifications, etc).

Regards

anis

hi ;

as i said,i need to replace logic of deletion process for dm_document.

vbreivik

Hi.

This is a bug in DFC. It is described in Issue number DFC-2304 in powerlink.:

Problem Summary:	TBO registration for dm_document fails with java.lang.StackOverflowException
Planned Fix Release:	7.0,6.5SP1

Regards,

Vidar

RaviJha

Although a StackOverFlowError looks like a bug to me, it is not recommended to write a TBO to override documentum intrinsic types like dm_**** or dmc_****.

Doesn't creating a subtype of dm_document and just overriding doDestroy() in the TBO serve your purpose?

Ravi

anis

hi,

i must override the dodestroy() for dm_document, i can't use a subtype of dm_document.

maybe exists another way to override the dodestroy() of dm_document?

thank you for your response

RakeshHK

Hi,

As mentioned by someone already earlier, the issue you are seeing is similar to DFC-2304 which has been fixed.What version of DFC are you using? If you have the latest hotfix of that DFC then you shouldn't face this issue anymore

Francois Dauberlieu

Since you can't use a TBO against dm_document, why don;t you customize the Delete component in whichever client you're using ? I'm afraid that's the only way for you to proceed.

CláudioGil

Wouldn't it be possible to attach an aspect to dm_document instead? You can override the behavior of destroy in the aspect implementation.

anis

thank you for your responses ,

i will use an aspect to override the dodestroy() of dm_document

regards,

anis

manugupta

Hi Anis

Were you able to solve the problem by attaching an aspects to dm_document .

Can we apply "aspects" to dm_document so as to override dodestroy in dm_document

Thanks in advance