<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Hi
Peter,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I knew
that 0.1 second is too much for this :) but I used it just for comparison
purpose ( And to make you check your system and come up with some real
time stats ).</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>But
this is not the major mistake I made actually.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I
didn't consider that even SAP's system programs need to do some checking to
start the scheduled jobs after 2 year ( I think almost every
second along with all other scheduled jobs )</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>But
then all is not lost . I will use this example when I'll write a book called
"SAP for Stupid" :-). I've gathered a lot of these ,
mostly my own contributions ...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Cheers,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=036213814-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Ram</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu
[mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Peter
Roehlen<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, May 05, 2005 7:51 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
sap-wug@mit.edu<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: 2 year wait vs Batch
Report<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Hi Alon & Ram,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The below piqued my interest so I had a look at our production system and
checked some stats. (I was a bit concerned about the .1 second
allocation for every record in Ram's example.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We have at present 519 workitems with monitored deadlines (ie records in
table SWWWIDH.) In the 24 hours of May 4, the job ran every ten minutes
for a total of 142 times. The total run time for the day was 85
seconds.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Assuming an hourly run (per the example outlined below) this would result
in a run time of 14 seconds for the day (85 / 142 / 24). Over two years
this would equate to 170 minutes (14 * 365 * 2 / 60) or approximately 3
hours.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'm no accountant, but I think 3 hours spread over two years is
probably affordable ; )</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Interesting discussion anyway.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Cheers</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Peter Roehlen.<BR><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Date:
Thu, 5 May 2005 19:19:12 +0530<BR>From: "Tiwari, Rammanohar"
<rammanohar.tiwari@logicacmg.com><BR>To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group"
<sap-wug@mit.edu><BR>Subject: RE: 2 year wait vs Batch Report<BR><BR>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=GENERATOR>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Hi
Alon,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>First of all sorry for sending the mail twice . I am a first timer
and I didn't know that I won't receive my own mail, so I thought
it is bouncing.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Well first of all I am not sure if the option I put forward is
feasible or not and it is just an option :)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>But if it is then there might be some advantage from the system
perspective, over daily monitoring, in the sense:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>if
your daily monitoring Job runs every hour and this particular check takes
0.1 second to run ( I think there is a dbaccess to compare the
triggering date & time ) for one workflow execute then total time for
400 workflow instances will be ( total time to run this check = 0.1 * 400 *
24 * 360 * 2 / 3600 = 192 hrs ).</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I
am really sorry if I've made some major mistake in calculating
this.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>So
actually system will run 192 hrs for this case.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Now if you are scheduling 400 jobs for 400 instances but
just for once and will execute after 2 years then ( total time = 0.1 * 400 /
3600 =~ 0.01 hrs )</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Also, I am just putting it forward, just as a theoretical option
so you can't blame me :)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Thanks,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=538572313-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Ram</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu
[mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Alon
Raaskin<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, May 05, 2005 6:23 PM<BR><B>To:</B> SAP
Workflow Users' Group<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: 2 year wait vs Batch
Report<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText63325 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Hi Ram,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thanks for the input. My problem with
this approach is that I now have a batch job scheduled for each instance
of the workflow (around 400 or so)... I guess it not a big deal but I am
not sure I am seeing what the advantages of using this over the deadline
monitoring report...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#000000
size=2></FONT> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=idSignature20148 dir=ltr>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG>Alon Raskin</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG>e: </STRONG><A
href="mailto:araskin@3i-consulting.com"
target=_blank><STRONG>araskin@3i-consulting.com</STRONG></A></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG>p: +61 3 9625 2189 (Head
Office)</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG>f: +61 3 8610 1239 </STRONG></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG>c: +1 207 756 0370</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG>w: </STRONG><A
href="http://au.f212.mail.yahoo.com/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.3i-consulting.com/"
target=_blank><STRONG>http://www.3i-consulting.com</STRONG></A></DIV></STRONG></DIV></FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><BR>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu on behalf of
Tiwari, Rammanohar<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thu 5/5/2005 08:49<BR><B>To:</B> SAP
Workflow Users' Group<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: 2 year wait vs Batch
Report<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=959333712-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>I think there might be another option ( Not sure though
) :</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=959333712-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=959333712-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Just after that step in your workflow put another step which will
schedule a Batch Job (FM BP_JOB_CREATE) with release date = sy-datum
+ 2 years.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=959333712-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>I am not sure but system restart should not affect it.
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=959333712-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=959333712-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>The Batch job will then trigger an event ( after two years )
to re-start the terminated workflow.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=959333712-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=959333712-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Thanks,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=959333712-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Ram</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=959333712-05052005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu]<B>On Behalf Of
</B>Alon Raaskin<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, May 05, 2005 5:26
PM<BR><B>To:</B> SAP Workflow Users' Group<BR><B>Subject:</B> 2 year
wait vs Batch Report<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText72845 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Hi
Everyone,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>I would love to hear peoples
opinions on this issue.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>We have a situation where a
workflow has to do update a field and then wait for 2 years before
clearing that field. There are two possibilities to this
issue.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>1. Put in a 2 year wait
step</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. Terminate the workflow and run a
nightly batch job which would query some table and determine if 2 years
have passed and then reset the field accordingly.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Currently I am leaning towards
option 1 as I really don't see a difference in option 1 and option 2.
Ultimately they are all just batch jobs which check dates and then do
some processing. The volumes here are very low.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Your thoughts?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#000000
size=2></FONT> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=idSignature14617 dir=ltr>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG>Alon Raskin</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG>e: </STRONG><A
href="mailto:araskin@3i-consulting.com"
target=_blank><STRONG>araskin@3i-consulting.com</STRONG></A></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><STRONG></STRONG></DIV><STRONG>w: </STRONG><A
href="http://au.f212.mail.yahoo.com/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.3i-consulting.com/"
target=_blank><STRONG>http://www.3i-consulting.com</STRONG></A></STRONG></FONT></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>This
e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended
recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential
information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied,
disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an
intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any
attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank
you.<BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>This e-mail and any attachment is for
authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary
material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It
should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If
yo! u are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail
and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.<BR>Date:
Thu, 5 May 2005 09:59:22 -0400<BR>From: "Alon Raskin"
<araskin@3i-consulting.com><BR>To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group"
<sap-wug@mit.edu><BR>Subject: RE: 2 year wait vs Batch
Report<BR><BR>Hi Thomas,<BR><BR>I appreciate your input but I was wondering
WHY you have this preference? Is it performance related? Or simply past
experience?<BR><BR>Alon Raskin<BR>e: araskin@3i-consulting.com
<MAILTO:ARASKIN@3I-CONSULTING.COM><BR>p: +61 3 9625 2189 (Head Office)<BR>f:
+61 3 8610 1239 <BR>c: +1 207 756 0370<BR>w:
http://www.3i-consulting.com<BR><BR>________________________________<BR><BR>From:
sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu on behalf of Thomas Lorenz<BR>Sent: Thu 5/5/2005
09:46<BR>To: SAP Workflow Users' Group<BR>Subject: AW: 2 year wait vs Batch
Report<BR><BR><BR>Hi Alon,<BR><BR>i would prefer an additional ABAP Report
to clear the field, which ! runs as Batch once a day. In my opinion it makes
little sense to keep these Workflows for two years in "running"
mode.<BR><BR>Greetings,<BR><BR>Thomas Lorenz<BR><BR><BR>mobil + 49 170
3558989<BR>mail tlorenz@web-ls.de<BR>fon + 49 228 3867985<BR>fax + 49 228
3868844<BR><BR><BR><BR>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----<BR>Von: Alon Raskin
[mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu]Im Auftrag von Alon Raskin<BR>Gesendet:
Donnerstag, 5. Mai 2005 14:53<BR>An: SAP Workflow Users' Group<BR>Betreff:
RE: 2 year wait vs Batch Report<BR><BR><BR>Hi Ram,<BR><BR>Thanks for the
input. My problem with this approach is that I now have a batch job
scheduled for each instance of the workflow (around 400 or so)... I guess it
not a big deal but I am not sure I am seeing what the advantages of using
this over the deadline monitoring report...<BR><BR><BR><BR>Alon Raskin<BR>e:
araskin@3i-consulting.com <MAILTO:ARASKIN@3I-CONSULTING.COM><BR>p: +61 3
9625 2189 (Head Office)<BR>f: +61 3 8610 1239 <BR>c: +1 207 756 0370<BR>! w:
http://www.3i-consulting.com<BR><BR>________________________________<BR><BR>From:
sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu on behalf of Tiwari, Rammanohar<BR>Sent: Thu
5/5/2005 08:49<BR>To: SAP Workflow Users' Group<BR>Subject: RE: 2 year wait
vs Batch Report<BR><BR><BR>I think there might be another option ( Not sure
though ) :<BR><BR>Just after that step in your workflow put another step
which will schedule a Batch Job (FM BP_JOB_CREATE) with release date =
sy-datum + 2 years.<BR>I am not sure but system restart should not affect
it. <BR><BR>The Batch job will then trigger an event ( after two years ) to
re-start the terminated
workflow.<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR>Ram<BR><BR><BR>-----Original
Message-----<BR>From: sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu
[mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu]On Behalf Of Alon Raskin<BR>Sent: Thursday,
May 05, 2005 5:26 PM<BR>To: SAP Workflow Users' Group<BR>Subject: 2 year
wait vs Batch Report<BR><BR><BR>Hi Everyone,<BR><BR>I would love to hear
peoples opinions on this issue.<BR><BR>We ! have a situation where a
workflow has to do update a field and then wait for 2 years before clearing
that field. There are two possibilities to this issue.<BR><BR>1. Put in a 2
year wait step<BR>2. Terminate the workflow and run a nightly batch job
which would query some table and determine if 2 years have passed and then
reset the field accordingly.<BR><BR>Currently I am leaning towards option 1
as I really don't see a difference in option 1 and option 2. Ultimately they
are all just batch jobs which check dates and then do some processing. The
volumes here are very low.<BR><BR>Your thoughts?<BR><BR><BR><BR>Alon
Raskin<BR>e: araskin@3i-consulting.com
<MAILTO:ARASKIN@3I-CONSULTING.COM><BR><BR>w:
http://www.3i-consulting.com<BR><BR><BR>This e-mail and any attachment is
for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain
proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal
privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, an! y
other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly
delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender.
Thank
you.<BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>SAP-WUG
mailing
list<BR>SAP-WUG@mit.edu<BR>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></MAILTO:ARASKIN@3I-CONSULTING.COM></MAILTO:ARASKIN@3I-CONSULTING.COM></MAILTO:ARASKIN@3I-CONSULTING.COM>
<P><BR>
<HR SIZE=1>
Find local movie times and trailers on <A
href="http://au.rd.yahoo.com/mail/tagline/*http://au.movies.yahoo.com"
target=_blank><B>Yahoo! Movies.</B></A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.<BR>
</BODY></HTML>