<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Jocelyn,<div><br></div><div>When we upgraded to ECC 6.0 a little over a year ago, I did not convert our existing workflow templates to use XML persistence. Therefore their profiles are all set as "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: -webkit-monospace; font-size: 10px; white-space: pre; "><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Helvetica" size="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; white-space: normal;">Compatibility." I compared our container handling between development and production via transaction </span></font><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; white-space: normal; ">SWU_CONT_PERSISTENCE. But this seems to be used to maintain the outdated "Structure" mode configuration. The table is empty in both environments. Is there another transaction I should run to check container handling?</span></span></div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: -webkit-monospace; font-size: 10px; white-space: pre; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; white-space: normal; ">We have reports that read workflow containers which is one of the reasons I chose not to convert. It is my understanding that converting to XML persistence means I would need to change these reports. Since we weren't experiencing performance or storage concerns I didn't have the incentive to convert. Also, wouldn't I need to change all the business object container operations if we converted?</span></span></div><div><br></div><div>A lot of these old custom workflow templates created by the non-workflow developer caused us heartaches during our upgrade to ECC 6.0, which is how I discovered some of his unorthodox practices, but they are all working smoothly now.</div><div><br></div><div>Carolyn</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div><div>On Feb 11, 2009, at 7:28 PM, Dart, Jocelyn wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>Carolyn - just a thought - check in your workflow admin settings that<br>both systems are set up with the same container handling (XML) and<br>persistency rules. Also if you aren't already doing this... make sure<br>your test scripts for QA always include a test on workflow instances<br>that was created and running before your changes were applied. It can<br>be worthwhile deliberately creating workflow instances for this purpose<br>before importing your changes into QA. <br>Regards,<br>Jocelyn <br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: sap-wug-bounces@MIT.EDU [<a href="mailto:sap-wug-bounces@MIT.EDU">mailto:sap-wug-bounces@MIT.EDU</a>] On Behalf<br>Of Carolyn Fuller<br>Sent: Thursday, 12 February 2009 11:05 AM<br>To: SAP Workflow Users' Group<br>Subject: Re: Binding issues after transport to production<br><br>Alon,<br><br>Yes. We modified the workflow binding in production in order to fix <br>the problems that appeared in production but did not appear in either <br>QA or development.<br><br>Carolyn<br>On Feb 11, 2009, at 4:16 PM, Alon Raskin wrote:<br><br><blockquote type="cite">Just to clarify, you are modifying the workflows directly in the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">production system?<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Alon Raskin<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">e: <a href="mailto:araskin@3i-consulting.com">araskin@3i-consulting.com</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">-----Original Message-----<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">From: sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu [<a href="mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu">mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</a>] On <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Behalf<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Of Carolyn Fuller<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 2:17 PM<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">To: SAP Workflow Users' Group<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Subject: Binding issues after transport to production<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Hi all,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">On a couple of occasions I've moved modified workflows from our<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">development environment to our QA environment with no problems only to<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">encounter binding issues in production. On these occasions, deleting<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the bindings in production and re-creating them in production has<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">solved the problem.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Are these issues due to the fact that I didn't run SWU_OBUF after the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">transports went in? Should SWU_OBUF be on our action log when modified<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">workflows go into production?<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">---<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Carolyn Fuller<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Massachusetts Institute of Technology<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Information Services and Technology<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Administrative Computing<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Senior Analyst/ Programmer<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">(617) 253-6213<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://fuller.mit.edu/">http://fuller.mit.edu/</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">SAP-WUG mailing list<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">SAP-WUG mailing list<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br></blockquote><br>_______________________________________________<br>SAP-WUG mailing list<br><a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><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></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>