<!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 6.00.2800.1505" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7>
<DIV>
<P>Mike<SPAN class=288480118-23092005> and Ramki</SPAN>,</P>
<P>Thanks for the input<SPAN class=288480118-23092005>s</SPAN>. <SPAN
class=288480118-23092005> Between both of your suggestions, I think I have a
path to resolve the problem now.</SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN class=288480118-23092005>Cheers, and have a great weekend!</SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN class=288480118-23092005>Margaret</SPAN></P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu
[mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu]<B>On Behalf Of
</B>Workflow99@aol.com<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, September 23, 2005 1:35
PM<BR><B>To:</B> sap-wug@mit.edu<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Emailing work items -
time delays with batch processing<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT id=role_document
face=Arial color=#000000>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>Margaret,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If you are on WAS 6.10 or higher, you can develop a method to send a mail
using BCS intreface without having to depend on RSCONN... Use the URL
below to see Thomas Jung's SDN weblog on using BCS.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A
href="https://www.sdn.sap.com/sdn/weblogs.sdn?blog=/pub/wlg/789">https://www.sdn.sap.com/sdn/weblogs.sdn?blog=/pub/wlg/789</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Arial PTSIZE="10" FAMILY="SANSSERIF">Regards,<BR>Ramki
Maley<BR>Workflow Developer, USCBP.<BR>248-613-1287 (C)</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 9/23/2005 11:47:30 AM Eastern Standard Time,
wug.replies@workflowconnections.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000>Hi
Margaret,<BR>I've always treated RSWUWFML as a 'reminder' job. Why not send
an email<BR>from your WF instead?<BR>You will still have delays between
SapConnect and Notes, but that's under<BR>the control of your Basis and
Notes people. You could of course also have<BR>a sendmail step followed by
one that runs the RSCONN... job for the<BR>fastest turnaround :-)<BR><BR>By
the way, RSWUWFML is also a fairly intensive job since it trawls<BR>through
a lot of agent evaluations and stuff and shouldn't be run quite<BR>that
often.<BR><BR>Cheers<BR>Mike<BR><BR>Hilsbos, Margaret A wrote:<BR>> Hello
all,<BR>><BR>> This is a kind of general question where I am fishing
for the best<BR>> approach/answer to an anticipated
problem.<BR>><BR>> Currently we are implementing a workflow on a WAS
620 CRM box that is<BR>> replacing a homegrown, Lotus-Notes based
application. I have set up the<BR>> RSWUWFML2 job to email work
items to the users, but I see this as a<BR>> looming headache
because:<BR>><BR>> - the LN app sent the corresponding emails
immediately (at least that is<BR>> the perception), with no significant
delay<BR>> - even if I set up the RSWUWFML2 and SAPConnect jobs each to
run every<BR>> minute (which I think Basis doesn't want to do anyway),
there is still<BR>> potentially up to a 2 minute delay from when a step
is completed and the<BR>> next item is sent from SAP to an Outlook
recipient.<BR>> - In testing, with the jobs set to 1-minute intervals, we
were seeing even<BR>> greater delays than expected (like 15 minutes or
more). I have asked<BR>> Basis to look at it but I'm guessing the
jobs are going into a queue that<BR>> is holding them up, and I
suspect we won't be able to fix it easily, if<BR>> that's the
case.<BR>><BR>> Here's my questions:<BR>> - is there a better way
to do this in our current environment? Are we just<BR>> doing it wrong
altogether?<BR>> - Would integrating the solution in the Portal
(EP6-point-whatever) buy us<BR>> anything?<BR>> - has SAP introduced,
or is it planning to introduce, newer components<BR>> that make the email
integration more seamless? If so what are they, and<BR>> how can I find
out more about implementing them?<BR>><BR>> A 2-minute delay in the
processing may seem like nothing to us, but I'm<BR>> expecting it to be a
user-acceptance hurdle for this process. And I'm a<BR>> bit cranky about
the 2 minute (plus!) thing myself, considering this is an<BR>> internal
process with all the users on the same floor of the same<BR>>
building. Sneaker-net would almost be faster.<BR>><BR>> Your
thoughts, ideas?<BR>><BR>> Thanks,<BR>><BR>> Margaret
Hilsbos<BR>> Day & Zimmermann<BR>><BR>><BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> SAP-WUG mailing
list<BR>> SAP-WUG@mit.edu<BR>>
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug<BR>><BR><BR><BR>Mike
Pokraka<BR>Senior Consultant<BR>Workflow Connections Ltd.<BR>Mobile: +44
(0)7786 910
855<BR>_______________________________________________<BR>SAP-WUG mailing
list<BR>SAP-WUG@mit.edu<BR>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BODY></HTML>