<html dir="ltr"><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style>.hmmessage P {
PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY.hmmessage {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma
}
</style>
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.3790.2920" name="GENERATOR">
<style title="owaParaStyle">P {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px
}
</style>
</head>
<body class="hmmessage" ocsi="x">
<div dir="ltr"><font face="Tahoma" color="#000000" size="2">Hi Mikey,</font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma"></font> </div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma">I just took a look at our sandbox and I see a logical system in most of our entries. We are on ECC 6.0 patch level 13.</font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma"></font> </div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma">Out of approximately 200K entries in this table, I did find approximately 9K entries without LogSys including _WORKITEM entries.
</font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma">I am honestly not sure why some do and some don't. Maybe others have an idea?</font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma"></font> </div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma">Oh and you are so old school for using that table (though I do understand why) :-)</font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma"></font> </div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="tahoma"><font face="tahoma"><font face="tahoma"><font face="tahoma"><font face="tahoma"><font face="tahoma"><font face="tahoma"><font face="tahoma">Alon</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div>
<div>
<div><font face="Tahoma" size="2">
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="navy" size="3"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Calibri"></span></font><strong> </strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="navy" size="3"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Calibri"><strong></strong></span></font> </p>
</font></div>
</div>
<div id="divRpF545651" style="DIRECTION: ltr">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><b>From:</b> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu [sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of Mike Gambier [madgambler@hotmail.com]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 11, 2008 6:30 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> SAP Workflow Users' Group<br>
<b>Subject:</b> ECC 6.0 SWW_CONTOB Logical System name not being updated properly<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<div></div>
<div>Hi,<br>
<br>
Has anyone else noticed or seen evidence of the 'old' Workflow Container table (SWW_CONTOB) not being updated properly where the Logical System name field (LOGSYS) is concerned? I'm a little bit worried that this field is only sometimes being updated when entries
are being added.<br>
<br>
Our 'new' Workflow instances do not appear to be updating this field when creating new entries, although any triggering event container instances do have their proper logical system name values.<br>
So, for example, '_WORKITEM' entries are being created with a blank value for LOGSYS (which just isn't right) whereas any importing container elements definitely do have a kosher value.<br>
<br>
This is causing us some grief with FMs like CHECK_OBJECT_IN_WF because the standard SAP code is looking for a like-for-like match with whatever value you pass through in OBJECT-LOGSYS.<br>
<br>
I'm going to trawl through OSS but I thought I'd ask around to see if this is a 'known' feature.<br>
<br>
I'd like to ask anybody else who is currently working on an upgrade project to check out their SWW_CONTOB entries too (that is if they still intend to use the old tables) and let me know if they have this problem at all, or whether it's just our system misbehaving
:)<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Mike GT<br>
<br>
<hr>
Think you know your TV, music and film? <a href="https://www.searchcharades.com" target="_blank">
Try Search Charades!</a> </div>
</body>
</html>