<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-AU link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>No worries Nanda... good luck with it... and keep an eye on those resources ... if things are running slowly check if all dialog/background processes are being used. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Enjoy!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Jocelyn<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Nandakumar Alavandar<br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, 27 July 2011 9:02 PM<br><b>To:</b> sap-wug@mit.edu<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 80, Issue 27<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='color:black'>Hi Jocelyn,<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='color:black'>Thanks for your time and valuable inputs, all my previous developments are based on the approval automation after creation of the documents, first time I am coming across the creation of documents for a huge process in workflow.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='color:black'> I will take consideration of the below inputs while developing and configuring the event queue, I am quite confident now when I hear it from the workflow 'GURU'.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='color:black'>Thanks & Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='color:black'>Nandakumar<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt;background:white'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> "sap-wug-request@mit.edu" <sap-wug-request@mit.edu><br><b>To:</b> sap-wug@mit.edu<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, 26 July 2011 11:24 PM<br><b>Subject:</b> SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 80, Issue 27<br></span><span style='color:black'><br>Send SAP-WUG mailing list submissions to<br> <a href="mailto:sap-wug@mit.edu">sap-wug@mit.edu</a><br><br>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br> <a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br> <a href="mailto:sap-wug-request@mit.edu">sap-wug-request@mit.edu</a><br><br>You can reach the person managing the list at<br> <a href="mailto:sap-wug-owner@mit.edu">sap-wug-owner@mit.edu</a><br><br>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>than "Re: Contents of SAP-WUG digest..."<br><br><br>Today's Topics:<br><br> 1. RE: Suggestion required for creating sales process through<br> workflow (Dart, Jocelyn)<br> 2. Have authority checks disappeared from WAPIs? (Mike Pokraka)<br> 3. RE: Have authority checks disappeared from WAPIs? (Mike Gambier)<br><br><br>----------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br>Message: 1<br>Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 04:14:35 +0200<br>From: "Dart, Jocelyn" <<a href="mailto:jocelyn.dart@sap.com">jocelyn.dart@sap.com</a>><br>Subject: RE: Suggestion required for creating sales process through<br> workflow<br>To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <<a href="mailto:sap-wug@mit.edu">sap-wug@mit.edu</a>><br>Message-ID:<br> <<a href="mailto:8C507B5E0BA5114E933C3C6E2E9729E0075B5AEEED@DEWDFECCR01.wdf.sap.corp">8C507B5E0BA5114E933C3C6E2E9729E0075B5AEEED@DEWDFECCR01.wdf.sap.corp</a>><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br><br>Hi Nanda,<br><br><br>1) Nothing wrong with using CX_BO_TEMPORARY as a permanent solution ... although you might want to adjust the number of retries as well. Particularly if you are using the event queue to help spread the load.<br><br>2) That's what the Event Queue is for.<br><br>3) That's not an issue it's a description of the business scenario.<br><br>4) The point of the event queue is to drip feed the events into the system to AVOID system performance issues caused by too many events hitting the system at one time.<br><br>The numbers you are talking about 100s are actually fairly small volumes for workflow. Event queue should be enough for 100s and even 1000s.<br>But your stress test should include monitoring and if necessary adjusting the event queue parameters for read accesses and intervals - start with the standard and work from there.<br>Regards,<br>Jocelyn<br><br>From: <a href="mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</a>] On Behalf Of Nandakumar Alavandar<br>Sent: Saturday, 23 July 2011 7:50 PM<br>To: <a href="mailto:sap-wug@mit.edu">sap-wug@mit.edu</a><br>Subject: Suggestion required for creating sales process through workflow<br><br>Hi,<br><br>I have a specfic requirement to implement sales process worklow for my client .<br>Requirement:<br>The entire sales process starting from Sales order to Shipment cost is already completed in the legacy system, and the data is later send to Process Interface as a flat file to update the staging table in SAP through proxy.<br>The data recieved is for the previous day transactions, in few region records can be send every 20 minutes instantly from the legacy sytem to SAP .<br><br>The client is interested in doing the entire process of creation sales order to shipment process using the workflow , advantage the client thinks is the tracking process.<br><br>Issues Identified -<br>1) Locking issues while creating sales orders for the same contract.(there could be 400 sales order created in the same day and contract ),the CX_BO_TEMPORARY to handle the temporary locking issue but not a permant solution.<br>2) Huge volume of workflow events will be triggered in a short duration of time,<br>3) Each workflow instance triggered will be involved in creation of sales order to shipment cost prcoess.<br>4) Activated the event queue which distributes the load, but system performance could be affected.<br><br>Alternative solution proposed to do the entire process in schedule batch program and handle the error scenario through workflow .<br><br>Suggestion required whether the above process could be efficient through the workflow process for high voume data.<br><br>--<br>Warm Regards<br>Nanda kumar<br>SAP-Workflow Consultant.<br>Mobile: +61432070354<tel:%2B61432070354><br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: <a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20110726/2a9bea2d/attachment-0001.htm" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20110726/2a9bea2d/attachment-0001.htm</a><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>Message: 2<br>Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 11:46:14 +0100 (BST)<br>From: "Mike Pokraka" <<a href="mailto:wug@workflowconnections.com">wug@workflowconnections.com</a>><br>Subject: Have authority checks disappeared from WAPIs?<br>To: <a href="mailto:sap-wug@mit.edu">sap-wug@mit.edu</a><br>Message-ID:<br> <<a href="mailto:154b410a72d99e8c754a44f3f4e9fe33.squirrel@g.mail.aaisp.net.uk">154b410a72d99e8c754a44f3f4e9fe33.squirrel@g.mail.aaisp.net.uk</a>><br>Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1<br><br>G'Day,<br><br>I'm not sure if I've just noticed this or if it's been this way for a<br>while, or if my memory is deceiving me:<br><br>One upon a time the WAPIs used to be a formal wrapper for the equivalent<br>SWF*/SWW* function modules. I think the WAPIs used to do indirect auth<br>checks via these FM calls, however since the FMs can be overriden (e.g. FM<br>SWW_WI_ADMIN_CANCEL has a parameter AUTHORIZATION_CHECKED) I am not too<br>sure and have no 4.6 system handy to check.<br><br>Nowadays (ECC6) however, the WAPIs use OO methods internally and as far as<br>I have been able to establish there are no auth checks carried out - if a<br>user can execute FM SAP_WAPI_ADM_WORKFLOW_CANCEL by any means then they<br>can cancel a work item. Unfortunately I haven't been able to conclusively<br>test this with a user that has SE37 but no workitem admin access, but<br>debugging shows no auth check.<br><br>Could someone verify I've got this right? Has this changed? Am I just<br>confused?<br><br>I'm going to implement my own auth checks anyway, but I am very curious as<br>it *may* mean that custom code written pre-ECC could have turned into a<br>security hole post-upgrade.<br><br>Regards,<br>Mike<br><br><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>Message: 3<br>Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 13:24:05 +0000<br>From: Mike Gambier <<a href="mailto:madgambler@hotmail.com">madgambler@hotmail.com</a>><br>Subject: RE: Have authority checks disappeared from WAPIs?<br>To: <<a href="mailto:sap-wug@mit.edu">sap-wug@mit.edu</a>><br>Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:SNT107-W629B232CC9C1AF11E3AFC6D5320@phx.gbl">SNT107-W629B232CC9C1AF11E3AFC6D5320@phx.gbl</a>><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br><br><br>Mike,<br><br>Did you check that a call to CL_SWF_RUN_WIM_LOCAL->IF_SWF_RUN_WIM_UTL_INTERNAL~CHECK_AUTHORITY is NOT being executed?<br><br>I thought it would always be invoked, regardless of whether a WAPI is invoking the Workflow stuff.<br><br>Normally the ABAP OO Exception CX_SWF_RUN_WIM_AUTH_FAILED will be thrown I think.<br><br>Mike GT<br><br><br>> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 11:46:14 +0100<br>> Subject: Have authority checks disappeared from WAPIs?<br>> From: <a href="mailto:wug@workflowconnections.com">wug@workflowconnections.com</a><br>> To: <a href="mailto:sap-wug@mit.edu">sap-wug@mit.edu</a><br>> <br>> G'Day,<br>> <br>> I'm not sure if I've just noticed this or if it's been this way for a<br>> while, or if my memory is deceiving me:<br>> <br>> One upon a time the WAPIs used to be a formal wrapper for the equivalent<br>> SWF*/SWW* function modules. I think the WAPIs used to do indirect auth<br>> checks via these FM calls, however since the FMs can be overriden (e.g. FM<br>> SWW_WI_ADMIN_CANCEL has a parameter AUTHORIZATION_CHECKED) I am not too<br>> sure and have no 4.6 system handy to check.<br>> <br>> Nowadays (ECC6) however, the WAPIs use OO methods internally and as far as<br>> I have been able to establish there are no auth checks carried out - if a<br>> user can execute FM SAP_WAPI_ADM_WORKFLOW_CANCEL by any means then they<br>> can cancel a work item. Unfortunately I haven't been able to conclusively<br>> test this with a user that has SE37 but no workitem admin access, but<br>> debugging shows no auth check.<br>> <br>> Could someone verify I've got this right? Has this changed? Am I just<br>> confused?<br>> <br>> I'm going to implement my own auth checks anyway, but I am very curious as<br>> it *may* mean that custom code written pre-ECC could have turned into a<br>> security hole post-upgrade.<br>> <br>> Regards,<br>> Mike<br>> <br>> _______________________________________________<br>> SAP-WUG mailing list<br>> <a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br>> <a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br> <br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: <a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20110726/7a67b639/attachment.htm" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20110726/7a67b639/attachment.htm</a><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>SAP-WUG mailing list<br><a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br><br><br>End of SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 80, Issue 27<br>***************************************<br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></div></body></html>