<!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
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3020" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY class=hmmessage>
<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> </BODY></HTML>