<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><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 6.00.6000.16674" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY class=hmmessage bgColor=#fafafa>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>you /have/ to bind.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>The business object instances are cached in a global
memory, holding them there for the duration of the user's context session. So it
wouldn't be of any benefit.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Re-Defining the attribute to become "virtual" is
absolutely fine, as this is the purpose and meaning of a virtual attribute: To
deliver current / calculated data.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=Rick.Sample@graybar.com href="mailto:Rick.Sample@graybar.com">Sample,
Rick</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=sap-wug@mit.edu
href="mailto:sap-wug@mit.edu">SAP Workflow Users' Group</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, July 02, 2008 10:18
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: Release Strategy issues in
4.6c</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=049041220-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">I have a WF 101 question. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=049041220-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">On the Task bindings if I DO NOT bind
ZBUS2012 to the task (leaving it blank), will this force the task to
re-instantiate the object vs. passing in that copy?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=049041220-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">By default, I bind the objects. Especially on
Dialog steps where I will use some object attributes for the display in the
text.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=049041220-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=049041220-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">Rick</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=049041220-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=049041220-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu
[mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Sample,
Rick<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, July 02, 2008 11:22 AM<BR><B>To:</B> SAP
Workflow Users' Group<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: Release Strategy issues in
4.6c<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">All,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">Got some good ideas.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">I will post the details when I get the
best solution working. </FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">I already have an extended object,
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">and changing the BOR attributes 'sounds' like
the cleanest first attempt. i.e. no other code changes in all my
methods.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">But, I will have to see how it impacts my other
Wfs hanging on ZBUS2012 first. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">*Sigh*, Only doing reads, but a long qualification
process ahead with multiple apps using 2012. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">Also, the other performance issue not related to
Release Strategy, </FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">I plan on opening an OSS Customer Message.
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">Since we brought up another client for the
upgrade, it is REALLY impacting code sync'n up </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">for the RUNTIME. Gotta be some performance tuning
BASIS can do to help us out! </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">Again, thanks much and I really appreciate
it!</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">Rick</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=725530616-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu
[mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Mike
Gambier<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, July 02, 2008 10:56 AM<BR><B>To:</B> SAP
Workflow Users' Group<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: Release Strategy issues in
4.6c<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Rick,<BR> <BR>We use [<STRONG>swc_refresh_object
self</STRONG>]<STRONG> </STRONG>inside the Method but it's the same thing
as calling FM SWO_OBJECT_REFRESH.<BR> <BR>Pity about the async. You
might have to resort to a WAIT UP TO '0.5' SECONDS or
something.<BR> <BR>MGT<BR><BR>
<HR>
<BR>Subject: RE: Release Strategy issues in 4.6c<BR>Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008
10:37:59 -0500<BR>From: Rick.Sample@graybar.com<BR>To:
sap-wug@mit.edu<BR><BR><BR>
<META content="Microsoft SafeHTML" name=Generator>
<STYLE>
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.EC_hmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;}
</STYLE>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=EC_850053315-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">Hey Mike,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=EC_850053315-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">Yea, COMMIT WORK AND WAIT is not an option in one
of my tasks. It's async! </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=EC_850053315-02072008></SPAN><SPAN
class=EC_850053315-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=EC_850053315-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">When you say refresh the OBJECT, you are doing
exactly what? SWO_OBJECT_REFRESH? This I have not tried
yet.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=EC_850053315-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">I'll give these and the other suggestions a tonk
and determine what works best. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=EC_850053315-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=EC_850053315-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">Thanks much,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=EC_850053315-02072008><FONT
face="Microsoft Sans Serif">Rick</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Microsoft Sans Serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=EC_OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR>
<FONT face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu
[mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Mike
Gambier<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, July 02, 2008 10:22 AM<BR><B>To:</B> SAP
Workflow Users' Group<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: Release Strategy issues in
4.6c<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Rick,<BR> <BR>We've had problems with this kind of thing
before as well. Sometimes it seems that Workflow is just too quick for
the database changes to actually take hold with the implicit COMMIT
WORK statement issued inside the standard code.<BR> <BR>In the end
we resorted to explicit COMMIT WORK AND WAIT statements inside our
Methods where we wanted to be absolutely sure the changes have happened
before we proceed any further. This seems to have done the trick although it's
a bit clunky and really not that elegant at all.
<BR> <BR>Occasionally we also ask the BOR Object to refresh
itself at the end of these Methods to keep the OBJECT-_* structures
up to date when we think something important may have
changed.<BR> <BR>Using a Virtual attribute rather than a Database
attribute would enforce a certain 'delay' in retrieving the database value
again because you have to execute a discrete SELECT. This might be
enough time for the V2 updates to happen in the back-end in the
meantime. But then again it might not be enough of a delay if the
system is under stress and lots of updates are happening at the same
time.<BR> <BR>I guess it all depends on how soon after a database change
are you trying to fetch the new value?<BR> <BR>Regards,<BR> <BR>Mike
GT<BR><BR>> Subject: RE: Release Strategy issues in 4.6c<BR>> Date: Wed,
2 Jul 2008 09:59:57 -0500<BR>> From: Rick.Sample@graybar.com<BR>> To:
sap-wug@mit.edu<BR>> <BR>> Hi Florin,<BR>> <BR>> Sounds plausible
and I planned to extend the object after I figured out<BR>> the buffering
issue(s). <BR>> To recap:<BR>> 1. The standard BOR bus2012
swc_get_property self 'RELEASESTATUS'<BR>> l_status gets buffered data. Not
the current data I need when I need it.<BR>> 2. I run the SELECT... right
after the swc_get_property as a test,<BR>> without a few seconds wait and
still not the current data I need.<BR>> 3. If I do #2 with WAIT UP TO 3
SECONDS, I do get the most recent data.<BR>> <BR>> Now, what you are
saying is if I extend the attribute, make virtual, and<BR>> use SELECT ...,
I can bypass the WAIT?<BR>> What is the difference between getting from BOR
DATABASE attribute vs. a<BR>> SELECT in the method? The BOR bypassing the
buffers?<BR>> <BR>> Rick<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
-----Original Message-----<BR>> From: sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu
[mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf<BR>> Of Florin Wach<BR>>
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 8:46 AM<BR>> To: SAP Workflow Users'
Group<BR>> Subject: Re: Release Strategy issues in 4.6c<BR>> <BR>>
Hi,<BR>> <BR>> oh, I see. There's no problem with that on purchase
requisitions<BR>> BUS2105, as that table attribute is reading by itself
using a SELECT ...<BR>> FROM EBAN, but the same form within BUS2012 uses
the function module for<BR>> a buffered read.<BR>> <BR>> To work
around that, create a subtype w/delegation.<BR>> Redefine the attribute
ReleaseStatus<BR>> Change the Source from "Database field" to
"Virutal"<BR>> Create a coding with SELECT SINGLE FRGST FROM EKKO
INTO<BR>> object-releaseStatus WHERE ebeln = object-key.<BR>> <BR>>
Best wishes,<BR>> Florin<BR>> <BR>> -------- Original-Nachricht
--------<BR>> > Datum: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 08:37:34 -0500<BR>> > Von:
"Sample, Rick" <Rick.Sample@graybar.com><BR>> > An: "SAP Workflow
Users\' Group" <sap-wug@mit.edu><BR>> > Betreff: Release Strategy
issues in 4.6c<BR>> <BR>> > Hi WF's,<BR>> > <BR>> > I
have an issue with performance. I think! <BR>> > I have a Purchase
Release Strategy WF I am working on. <BR>> > User approves his step, Wf
catches the Release event and <BR>> > evaluates for next approver.
Standard approval stuff. <BR>> > <BR>> > The issue:<BR>> >
When user approves his task, wf event triggers, then I immediately go<BR>>
> and evaluate the Rel Strategy.<BR>> > The standard BOR
swc_get_property self 'RELEASESTATUS' l_status is<BR>> > obviously
getting the BUFFERED data. <BR>> > If I put in a WAIT UP TO 3 SECONDS
then to a SELECT with BYPASSING<BR>> > BUFFER I get the correct value
<BR>> > from the SELECT, and I can verify that the BOR get property is
the<BR>> > buffered data. <BR>> > <BR>> > In all my time
doing WF, I have never had to work around such a timing<BR>> > issues.
<BR>> > This solution 'appears' to work and is in a background task, so
I<BR>> don't<BR>> > think it will be an problem. <BR>> >
<BR>> > Also, I tried using the FMs in ME01 to refresh EKKO buffers,
read the<BR>> > EKKO buffered data, etc. with no success.<BR>> >
Anyone have a more elegant solution or comments with my above<BR>>
solution?<BR>> > <BR>> > Thanks much,<BR>> > <BR>> >
<BR>> > <BR>> >
_______________________________________________<BR>> > SAP-WUG mailing
list<BR>> > SAP-WUG@mit.edu<BR>> >
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug<BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> SAP-WUG mailing
list<BR>> SAP-WUG@mit.edu<BR>>
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug<BR>> <BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> SAP-WUG mailing
list<BR>> SAP-WUG@mit.edu<BR>>
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug<BR><BR><BR>
<HR>
Play Live Search Charades and win £5000 <A
href="http://www.searchcharades.com/" target=_blank>Think you know your TV,
music and film?</A> <BR>
<HR>
Play now! <A href="http://www.fishticuffs.co.uk" target=_new>Get fish-slapping
on Messenger</A>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>SAP-WUG mailing
list<BR>SAP-WUG@mit.edu<BR>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>