Clearing the Workflow buffer
Allan Pearson
Allan.Pearson at t-mobile.co.uk
Thu Jun 21 03:06:20 EDT 2007
Since upgrading to ECC6.0 we have a variation on refreshing WF buffers.
Changes in the dev. Client are not reflected in the config client (same
box). OSS gave us the following fix which works;
<Quote>
Generally you have to use for every changed workflow template such
procedure:
1. For example you have changed WSXXX in Version N. You activated it in
the your development client (RD1_120), but it is not enough now.
Now you have to call after that in the client where you start your
workflow instances (RD1_111) 3 additional steps:
a) SE37 -> Function SWD_WFD_REPLICATE_FROM_9999 for WSXXX and you get
the new runtime version N+1
b) SWU_OBUF
c) SE38 -> RSWDCLRBUF with parameters:
Workflow Definition WSXXX Version N (version before activation by
function)
<EndQuote>
Would be nice if somebody knows of a permanent fix so we can stop doing
this.
Regards
Allan Pearson
T-Mobile
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
Of sap-wug-request at mit.edu
Sent: 21 June 2007 00:15
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Subject: SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 31, Issue 57
Send SAP-WUG mailing list submissions to
sap-wug at mit.edu
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sap-wug-request at mit.edu
You can reach the person managing the list at
sap-wug-owner at mit.edu
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of SAP-WUG digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: ABAP OO (Susan R. Keohan)
2. Re: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0
(Paul.Bakker at osr.treasury.qld.gov.au)
3. RE: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0 (Morris, Eddie)
4. Clearing the Workflow buffer (Albina Fernando)
5. RE: Clearing the Workflow buffer (Miller, Jerry)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 16:48:58 -0400
From: "Susan R. Keohan" <keohan at ll.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: ABAP OO
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID: <467992BA.1080804 at ll.mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
John,
Ask for and you shall receive!
We will be fortunate to enjoy a very well done session by one of our own
(stop blushing Mr. Pokraka) who also presented 'Classy Workflows' at the
ASUG Annual Conference in Atlanta. Sadly, Mike's co-speaker, the lovely
and talented Anna Hill, will not be able to attend, since she works for
SAP (huh ? How does that make sense?). We will miss you Anna!
Regards,
Sue
John White wrote:
> Thank you Jocelyn, and nice work on the blogs!
>
> Your enthusiasm for ABAP OO is compelling, but sadly, my workflow
> experience has only been with BOR. But, I will make an effort to use
> this on my next workflow.
>
> Is there a tutorial available? I need some very basic information to
> start with! Maybe Sap TechEd 07 in Las Vegas will have a beginners
> session?
>
> Thanks again,
>
> John
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On
Behalf
> Of Dart, Jocelyn
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 2:24 AM
> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
> Subject: RE: Difference between Business object method and ABAP
> classmethodsin atask
>
>
> Hi John,
>
> Actually having worked with both ABAP OO for Workflow and BOR my
current
> opinion is - only use BOR for eventing if you are using - a standard
> workflow as-is or an event technique that doesn't support OO - like
> status management events.
>
> Otherwise stick with ABAP OO and link to the existing BOR using an
> attribute of type SIBFLPORB.
>
> Best of both worlds. ABAP OO is soooooooooooooooo much easier to use
> for enhancements.
>
>
> Regards,
> Jocelyn Dart
> Senior Consultant
> SAP Australia Pty Ltd.
> Level 1/168 Walker St.
> North Sydney
> NSW, 2060
> Australia
> T +61 412 390 267
> M + 61 412 390 267
> E jocelyn.dart at sap.com
> http://www.sap.com <http://www.sap.com/>
>
> The information contained in or attached to this electronic
transmission
> is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended only for
> the person or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any distribution,
> copying, review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this
> electronic transmission or the information contained in it is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in
error,
> please immediately contact the sender to arrange for the return of the
> original documents.
>
> Electronic transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure and
> accordingly, the sender does not accept liability for any such data
> corruption, interception, unauthorized amendment, viruses, delays or
the
> consequences thereof.
>
> Any views expressed in this electronic transmission are those of the
> individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the
> sender is authorized to state them to be the views of SAP AG or any of
> its subsidiaries. SAP AG, its subsidiaries, and their directors,
> officers and employees make no representation nor accept any liability
> for the accuracy or completeness of the views or information contained
> herein. Please be aware that the furnishing of any pricing
information/
> business proposal herein is indicative only, is subject to change and
> shall not be construed as an offer or as constituting a binding
> agreement on the part of SAP AG or any of its subsidiaries to enter
into
> any relationship, unless otherwise expressly stated.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On
Behalf
> Of John White
> Sent: Wednesday, 20 June 2007 6:53 AM
> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
> Subject: RE: Difference between Business object method and ABAP class
> methodsin atask
>
>
> I don't know the answer, but here is what I found on SDN. My
experience
> has only been with BOR object, creating new, and extending existing
> ones. Hope this helps!
>
> BOR objects is the category that have been around for a long time,
while
> CL is a (relatively) new possibility. You should use whatever is more
> practical in each case. For instance, if you are working with
employees
> and everything you need is in BOR object BUS1065 it makes sense to use
> that BOR object. If you find a class that has everything you need it
> makes (even more) sense to use that.
>
> If you have to create a completely new object type you should try to
> create a class instead of a new BOR object. If you simply need a
little
> bit of additional functionality or a new virtual attribute, my
> recommendation would be to extend the object type that exists instead
of
> trying to create a class that extends a BOR object.
>
> and,
> ABAP CLASS
> Template for objects in ABAP Objects. Defined using CLASS - ENDCLASS
> either globally in a class pool or locally in another ABAP program.
The
> definition of a class is made up of a declaration section for the
> declaration of theclass components and animplementation section for
the
> implementation of the methods.
> BOR-OBJECT TYPES
> mySAP Technology service and directory of all object types (business
> object types, organization object types and technical object types) in
> hierarchical order.
> The object types are each assigned to a packet (and thus indirectly
also
> to an application component).
> Directory of all object types in hierarchical order.
> The object types are each assigned a development class (and thus
> indirectly also to an application component).
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On
Behalf
> Of Albina Fernando
> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 1:41 PM
> To: sap-wug at mit.edu
> Subject: Difference between Business object method and ABAP class
> methods in atask
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone tell me the difference between using Business Object
method
> and Class methods in the tasks of the Workflow. For eg. When creating
a
> task we have 2 options. Either Assign a Business Object method or a
ABAP
> Object class method. So I need to know the difference between the two.
> And also the advantages of using the two...
> Thanks a lot for all ur support.
>
> Thanks
> Albina
>
>
> This email may contain confidential or privileged information for the
> intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please
do
> not use or disseminate the information, notify the sender and delete
it
> from your system. Thanks
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may
> contain privileged, confidential, or proprietary information
> which may be protected from disclosure under law, and is
> intended solely for the use of the individual, group, or entity
> to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of the
> named recipients, please notify the sender by e-mail and
> delete this message immediately from your computer. Any
> other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or
> copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. Thank you for
> your assistance.
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
--
Susan R. Keohan
SAP Workflow Developer
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
244 Wood Street
LI-200
Lexington, MA. 02420
Phone: 781-981-3561
Fax: 781-981-1607
keohan at ll.mit.edu
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 07:24:38 +1000
From: Paul.Bakker at osr.treasury.qld.gov.au
Subject: Re: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<OF09F3F4BD.E80E5A8E-ON4A257300.0074E5A7-4A257300.00759B01 at treasury.qld.
gov.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Joanne,
This kind of error occurs during binding, when a source *structure* (as
opposed to field) in a container does not match a target structure.
Unfortunately, it won't be picked up by syntax checks or one-on-one
testing, unless you provide both both source and target.
If you can pinpoint the step in the workflow where it fails, and closely
look at the *structure* variables that are in the binding, then you
should
find the culprit.
'Check'ing the bindings in each step should also help.
cheers
Paul Bakker
|---------+-------------------------------->
| | "Joanne Johnson" |
| | <JoanneJohnson at jo-ann|
| | stores.com> |
| | Sent by: |
| | sap-wug-bounces at mit.e|
| | du |
| | |
| | |
| | 20/06/2007 23:43 |
| | Please respond to |
| | "SAP Workflow Users' |
| | Group" |
| | |
|---------+-------------------------------->
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: <sap-wug at mit.edu>
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0
|
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------|
Hello all,
I created a custom workflow last year while we were in SAP v4.7. We are
currently in the process of upgrading to ECC 6.0 (Basis pkg level
SAPKB70011). This workflow no longer works in 6.0. It fails with an
error
message OL383 "The source and target structure have a different number
of
fields". I get this problem whether the workflow was created in 4.7
and
not worked until 6.0 or if it was created and worked in 6.0.
I researched this error message and found a number of OSS Notes that
imply
that there are lots of workflow problems in ECC 6.0 but none of them
refer
to the BOR I am using (BKPF). I did have several notes applied in 6.0
to
prevent potential problems (OSS Note 887076 - Incorrect Binding After
Upgrade and executed pgm ZRSWD_BINDING_RESTORE and OSS Note 1043988 -
Short
Dump When Workflow Restarted) however, they made no impact on the error.
I think the problem is a binding problem because the method that is
failing
is the IMPORT_FROM_BOR_CONTAINER however, when I test this method, it
seems
to work ok. There are no syntax errors anywhere in the workflow or in
the
business object BKPF or ZBKPF.
I also noticed that BOR BKPF has a new method in 6.0 called
BKPF.GetARLData
but that's related to ArchiveLink Data so I don't think that's causing
the
problem since I'm not executing that method.
Does anyone have any suggestions or insight? Thanks for the help.
Joanne Johnson
Jo-Ann Stores, Inc.
_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
******
Only an individual or entity who is intended to be a recipient of this
e-mail may access or use the information contained in this e-mail or any
of its attachments. Opinions contained in this e-mail or any of its
attachments do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Queensland
Treasury.
The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may
be legally privileged and the subject of copyright. If you have
received this e-mail in error, please notify Queensland Treasury
immediately and erase all copies of the e-mail and the attachments.
Queensland Treasury uses virus scanning software. However, it is not
liable for viruses present in this e-mail or in any attachment.
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
******
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:33:55 +0200
From: "Morris, Eddie" <eddie.morris at sap.com>
Subject: RE: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<E8A49408428BC34DA7C4FADD5237FAA20709379E at dewdfe22.wdf.sap.corp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Hi Joanne,
In relation to the error message OL383 can you check the method
associated with the step that shows this error.
The problem may be that an export parameter is incorrectly filled or not
filled at all in your method code. You must make sure that the variable
is filled before it is exported to the container and do not call
SWC_SET_ELEMENT unless your variable is filled. E.g
Data: OBJTYPE LIKE SWOTOBJID-OBJTYPE.
...
SWC_GET_OBJECT_TYPE BKPF_obj OBJTYPE.
IF NOT OBJTYPE IS INITIAL.
SWC_SET_ELEMENT CONTAINER 'BKPF_obj' BKPF_obj.
ENDIF.
Maybe this can help.
Regards,
Eddie
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
Of Joanne Johnson
Sent: 20 June 20, 2007 14:44
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Subject: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0
Hello all,
I created a custom workflow last year while we were in SAP v4.7. We are
currently in the process of upgrading to ECC 6.0 (Basis pkg level
SAPKB70011). This workflow no longer works in 6.0. It fails with an
error message OL383 "The source and target structure have a different
number of fields". I get this problem whether the workflow was created
in 4.7 and not worked until 6.0 or if it was created and worked in 6.0.
I researched this error message and found a number of OSS Notes that
imply that there are lots of workflow problems in ECC 6.0 but none of
them refer to the BOR I am using (BKPF). I did have several notes
applied in 6.0 to prevent potential problems (OSS Note 887076 -
Incorrect Binding After Upgrade and executed pgm ZRSWD_BINDING_RESTORE
and OSS Note 1043988 - Short Dump When Workflow Restarted) however, they
made no impact on the error.
I think the problem is a binding problem because the method that is
failing is the IMPORT_FROM_BOR_CONTAINER however, when I test this
method, it seems to work ok. There are no syntax errors anywhere in the
workflow or in the business object BKPF or ZBKPF.
I also noticed that BOR BKPF has a new method in 6.0 called
BKPF.GetARLData but that's related to ArchiveLink Data so I don't think
that's causing the problem since I'm not executing that method.
Does anyone have any suggestions or insight? Thanks for the help.
Joanne Johnson
Jo-Ann Stores, Inc.
_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 04:33:50 +0530
From: Albina Fernando <Albina.Fernando at lntinfotech.com>
Subject: Clearing the Workflow buffer
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Message-ID:
<OF17CD1152.6D49BB0F-ON65257300.007EB19A-65257300.007EB19E at lntinfotech.c
om>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20070621/bde9855c/a
ttachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 16:14:32 -0700
From: "Miller, Jerry" <Jerry.Miller at NOVELLUS.com>
Subject: RE: Clearing the Workflow buffer
To: "'SAP Workflow Users' Group'" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<63B36FB1288C1A4D8AE8B807730D47CF824564 at EVS1.corp.novellus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Call me and I will walk you thru one possible solution. (408.577.4513)
_____
From: Albina Fernando [mailto:Albina.Fernando at lntinfotech.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 4:04 PM
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Subject: Clearing the Workflow buffer
Hi All,
I have one problem.. Yesterday we had transported a new task to
Production. Now the new task is not reflecting in production. We checkd
the
Workflow runtime version. in the development system as well as the
produciton system, the active, running version is the same. We had faced
a
similar problem earlier also. but he same problem got resolved on its
own. I
had read in the Workflow book that every midnight the workflow buffers
are
refreshed. And then automatically the tasks come to the new version. Now
we
have waited for almost a day.. but nothing seems to be changing . Can we
manually clear the buffer. I suppose there is one transaction SWU_OBUF
to
clear the workflow buffer. Can anyone advise me if this is the correct
way
of doing or is there any job that clears/refreshes the runtime buffer.
How
should we proceed in such cases.
Thanks
Albina
This email may contain confidential or privileged information for the
intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please do
not
use or disseminate the information, notify the sender and delete it from
your system. Thanks
______________________________________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20070620/1075e6f6/a
ttachment.htm
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
End of SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 31, Issue 57
***************************************
T-Mobile (UK) Limited
Company Registered Number: 02382161
Registered Office Address: Hatfield Business Park, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL10 9BW
Registered in England and Wales
NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
This email (including attachments) is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, notify the sender immediately, delete this email from your system and do not disclose or use for any purpose.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20070621/143df0d2/attachment.htm
More information about the SAP-WUG
mailing list