On Nov 15, 2010, at 10:38 AM, Mike Pokraka wrote: > Hi Carolyn, > > SWU2 entries will only exist for the time the problem is active - i.e. 20 > minutes. I don't have access here either, but from memory you need to > click on the actual message to the right and it may tell you more. The > fact that you see something does indicate we're on the right track. > > Cheers, > Mike > > > On Mon, November 15, 2010 3:17 pm, Carolyn A Fuller wrote: >> Mike, >> >> I just ran SWU2 and I see one entry but it doesn't tell me much. I am >> pretty sure the SDN discussion about changing the context to a background >> user is the issue but I don't know why it all of a sudden became an issue. >> >> Over the weekend the basis team did change the scheduling of RSWERRE to >> every 20 minutes. But I'm thinking something else changed over the weekend >> also. Because by this time Friday, SWWLOGIHIST entries indicate RSWERRE >> had executed 9 times. So far this morning, it has not executed at all. >> >> Also, we discovered that this started becoming an issue on Oct 29 so I'm >> trying to find out what went into production the night before. I know the >> transport that increased the number of loops that one of the templates >> executes went into production that night. But I don't understand how that >> could have led to this particular problem. >> >> Carolyn >> >> >> On Nov 14, 2010, at 5:03 AM, Mike Pokraka wrote: >> >>> Hi Carolyn, >>> >>> Looks like it's not a WF problem but something on the basis end. The log >>> shows it starts a tRFC transaction and then nothing until the error job >>> picks it up. Part of the error job's function is to do exactly that. You >>> would normally see these sitting in SM58 or if you don't have access >>> then one of the WF transaction does the same (Could be SWU2? Just look >>> in the menu under administration -> RFC-something). As Rick also >>> mentioned, the RFC is to switch the context to a background user. >>> >>> You will only see this in SM58 between the step start and when the error >>> job picks it up, so a long schedule will be better for troubleshooting. >>> Maybe search for the task with today's date and status not COMPLETED in >>> SWI1 and keep refreshing throughout the day until you spot one. Then go >>> look in SM58 / SWU2 which should give you further info. The system log >>> may tell you more, or also worth checking dumps. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf >>> Of Carolyn A Fuller >>> Sent: 13 November 2010 21:44 >>> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group >>> Subject: Re: Background Workflow steps taking many hours to execute >>> >>> Rick, >>> >>> I have my personal workflow settings set to Technical View. And the logs >>> are all indicating green lights and no errors. >>> >>> I am not sure what you mean by "Admin would have logged a re-executed >>> every 20 mins." RSWERRE is scheduled for every 90 minutes. (Hopefully >>> this will change by Monday morning.) But even with it scheduled for >>> every 90 minutes I don't see a log indicating that anything re-executed. >>> >>> The workflow administrators do receive messages when any workflow errors >>> occur but we have not received any messages from these delayed >>> workflows. >>> >>> Carolyn >>> >>> On Nov 13, 2010, at 12:14 PM, Sample, Rick wrote: >>> >>>> one more thing, you should be able to see that in the log. >>>> Go to the task in question, tech view, and see what the logs tell you. >>>> Admin would have logged a re-executed every 20mins. Errors should be >>>> sent to the admin as msg. >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu >>>>> [mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] On >>>>> Behalf Of Sample, Rick >>>>> Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2010 10:56 AM >>>>> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group >>>>> Subject: RE: Background Workflow steps taking many hours to execute >>>>> >>>>> I agree, need more info. Like, any recent changes to code like a >>>>> loop? >>>>> >>>>> But, temp errors are default to 20mins. 20 >>>>> 20 and 20 is around 60, depending on >>>>> start / finish of SWWERR job. >>>>> Note: in 4.6c, the default was 20mins for the Temp Err, I believe >>>>> that has changed for ECC6 due to BPM. But we stuck to 20mins. >>>>> >>>>> So, if temp error, sounds like it was re- attempting something until >>>>> it finished. >>>>> *sounds* like it. >>>>> Check the Task BOR method for temp >>>>> exceptions. >>>>> >>>>> Rick Sample >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu >>>>>> [mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] On >>>>>> Behalf Of Jimmy Sun >>>>>> Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2010 >>>>> 9:58 AM >>>>>> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group >>>>>> Subject: Re: Background Workflow >>>>> steps taking many hours to execute >>>>>> >>>>>> Carolyn, >>>>>> If you can explain more detail of what is >>>>> the step doing, it will help >>>>>> to determine ther problem. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jimmy Sun >>>>>> Senior Consultant >>>>>> On 11/12/10, Carolyn A Fuller >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Recently, my end users have started >>>>>> complaining about the performance >>>>>>> of some of their workflow background >>>>>> steps. They said that this has >>>>>>> just recently become a problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Today, I looked at the logs for one of >>>>> the >>>>>> excessively slow workflow >>>>>>> background steps and it indicated that >>>>>> the background step was created >>>>>>> at 14:37:49, then started and ended >>>>>> over an hour later at 15:40:06. >>>>>>> This step normally takes less than a >>>>>> second to execute. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What could cause the hour delay >>>>>> between when the step was created and >>>>>>> when the step actually started and >>>>>> ended? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The workflow in question is using XML >>>>>> persistence. I converted this >>>>>>> workflow to using XML persistence >>>>>> about a year and a half ago. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Carolyn Fuller >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Senior Analyst/ Programmer >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Information Services and Technology >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Massachusetts Institute of Technology >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Room W92-210 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cambridge, MA 02139 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (617) 253-6213 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://fuller.mit.edu/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 「Money is gone, nothing is >>>>>> gone.（失去了金錢，沒有失去什麼）； >>>>>> Hope is gone, everything is >>>>>> >>>>> gone.（失去了希望，就失去了全部）。」 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> __________________________________ >>>>>> _____________ >>>>>> SAP-WUG mailing list >>>>>> SAP-WUG@mit.edu >>>>>> >>>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap >>>>>> -wug >>>>> >>>>> __________________________________ >>>>> _____________ >>>>> SAP-WUG mailing list >>>>> SAP-WUG@mit.edu >>>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap >>>>> -wug >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> SAP-WUG mailing list >>>> SAP-WUG@mit.edu >>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SAP-WUG mailing list >>> SAP-WUG@mit.edu >>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SAP-WUG mailing list >>> SAP-WUG@mit.edu >>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SAP-WUG mailing list >> SAP-WUG@mit.edu >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug >> > > > _______________________________________________ > SAP-WUG mailing list > SAP-WUG@mit.edu > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug