<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'><font style="font-size:16pt;" color="#000000" face="Garamond" size="4">Thanks, James. Talk about lessons learned!<br id="FontBreak"></font><br><br><font style="font-size:12pt;"><strong><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:16pt;"><font face="Tahoma"><font style="font-size:10pt;" size="2">Ed Diehl</font><br></font></font></font></strong></font><font style="font-size: 12pt;" size="3"><font face="Tahoma"><span style="color:rgb(0, 0, 0);"><em>"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm."</em> </span><br><br></font></font><br><br><div><hr id="stopSpelling">To: sap-wug@mit.edu<br>Subject: RE: Event Raised - WF-BATCH Configured - No Workflow<br>From: JJOHNSON@uk.ibm.com<br>Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 21:31:09 +0100<br><br><font face="sans-serif" size="2">Hi all,</font>
<br>
<br><font face="sans-serif" size="2">As promised, here's an update - we fixed
the issue. The fix in my instance requires the Basis team to conduct a
number of resolution actions.</font>
<br>
<br><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><b>Cause of the issue</b>: poor performance
in table access of SWWWIHEAD and SWW_WI2OBJ, </font><font size="2">ARFCSSTATE,
ARFCSDATA, ARFCRSTATE, TRFCQOUT, TRFCQIN, TRFCQSTATE and TRFCQDATA</font><font face="sans-serif" size="2">
tables (the first two being core workflows, the rest being Basis tables).
A time-out was occuring on the tRFC used to request workflow creation
in the instances where a dialogue process was attempting to be used. The
process was dialogue (instead of background) as the events/workflows affected
were created under the user's name instead of WF-BATCH.</font>
<br>
<br><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><b>Fix</b>: One-off rebuild of the index
for SWWWIHEAD and SWW_WI2OBJ, in addition to the update of the statistics
for those tables. Recommendation to Basis for a daily process to
be instigated going forward, where indexing is rebuilt for the above Basis
tables (due to their rapid expansion and contraction in size, the index
rapidly degenerates). The affected tRFCs (where events delivery didn't
create the associated workflow) were re-executed by Basis and all workflows
were produced.</font>
<br>
<br><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><b>Result</b>: Event delivery
now causes the associated workflow to be produced, in 0.5 seconds compared
to a time-out occuring after 10 minutes. Happy workflows means happy
James :).</font>
<br>
<br><font face="sans-serif" size="2">Best Regards,<br>
James Johnson<br>
<br>
E-mail:JJohnson@uk.ibm.com<br>
Mobile: 07908715224 or 07920870270</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1">From:
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">James Johnson/UK/IBM@IBMGB</font>
<br><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1">To:
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">"SAP Workflow
Users' Group" <sap-wug@mit.edu>, </font>
<br><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1">Date:
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">11/09/2013 11:30</font>
<br><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1">Subject:
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">RE: Event Raised
- WF-BATCH Configured - No Workflow</font>
<br><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1">Sent by:
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</font>
<br>
<hr noshade="">
<br>
<br>
<br><font face="sans-serif" size="2">Hi Ed,</font><font size="3"> <br>
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><br>
That's a pretty daring approach, deleting stuff out of workflow master
data tables usually results in bad things. Yes, we got the same issue
in production, the BASIS guys are looking into the RFC statuses in SM58,
SCN also suggested authorisation to execute RFCs as a possible issue but
they haven't changed in this case (and before this issue manifested, there
was a period where workflows were creating, just with a ~8 hour delay after
being delivered from the event queue). Next test is amending the workflow
to 'general task,' will let everyone know how the issue gets resolved :)</font><font size="3">
<br>
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><br>
Best Regards,<br>
James Johnson<br>
<br>
E-mail:JJohnson@uk.ibm.com<br>
Mobile: 07908715224 or 07920870270</font><font size="3"> <br>
<br>
<br>
</font><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1"><br>
From: </font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">Edward
Diehl <edwarddiehl@hotmail.com></font><font size="3"> </font><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1"><br>
To: </font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">"SAP
Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug@mit.edu>, </font><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1"><br>
Date: </font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">10/09/2013
19:22</font><font size="3"> </font><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1"><br>
Subject: </font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">RE:
Event Raised - WF-BATCH Configured - No Workflow</font><font size="3"> </font><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1"><br>
Sent by: </font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</font><font size="3">
<br>
</font>
<hr noshade=""><font size="3"><br>
<br>
</font><font face="Garamond" size="4"><br>
Thanks, James.<br>
We were able to get workflows going again by deleting bunchs of stuff out
of SWWWIHEAD, etc. When we copied production to the test system it
was a total misfit from a capacity standpoint. Perhaps now I can
get them interested in deleting/archiving old data.<br>
<br>
Did you get that same RFC status message?</font><font face="Calibri" size="3"><br>
</font><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><b><br>
<br>
Ed Diehl</b></font><font face="Tahoma" size="3"><i><br>
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm."</i> </font><font face="Calibri" size="3"><br>
<br>
</font><font size="3"><br>
<br>
</font>
<hr><font face="Calibri" size="3">To: sap-wug@mit.edu<br>
Subject: Re: Event Raised - WF-BATCH Configured - No Workflow<br>
From: JJOHNSON@uk.ibm.com<br>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 18:46:58 +0100</font><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><br>
<br>
Funnily enough, this exact same issue to my client, happened over the last
couple of days. I did the workflow analysis and passed it over to
our BASIS team. If I get any response back I'll post to the group
for information. <br>
<br>
Best Regards,<br>
James Johnson<br>
<br>
E-mail:JJohnson@uk.ibm.com<br>
Mobile: 07908715224 or 07920870270</font><font face="Calibri" size="3"> <br>
<br>
</font><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1"><br>
<br>
From: </font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">Rick
Bakker <rbakker@gmail.com></font><font face="Calibri" size="3"> </font><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1"><br>
To: </font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">"SAP
Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug@mit.edu>, </font><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1"><br>
Date: </font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">09/09/2013
23:28</font><font face="Calibri" size="3"> </font><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1"><br>
Subject: </font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">Re:
Event Raised - WF-BATCH Configured - No Workflow</font><font face="Calibri" size="3">
</font><font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1"><br>
Sent by: </font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</font><font face="Calibri" size="3">
</font><font size="3"><br>
</font>
<hr noshade=""><font face="Calibri" size="3"><br>
<br>
<br>
Hello Ed, <br>
<br>
Try OSS </font><font color="#2f2f2f" face="Arial" size="1">Note 1025249 - Entries
in transaction SM58 "hang"</font><font face="Calibri" size="3">
</font><font color="#2f2f2f" face="Arial" size="1"><br>
"If a large number of deadlines are due at the same time, some of
the entries in transaction SM58 may hang. The entries have a workflow destination
WORKFLOW_LOCAL_<xxx> (xxx denotes the client) as the target system."</font><font face="Calibri" size="3">
</font><font color="#2f2f2f" face="Arial" size="1"><br>
<br>
regards</font><font face="Calibri" size="3"> </font><font color="#2f2f2f" face="Arial" size="1"><br>
Rick</font><font face="Calibri" size="3"> <br>
<br>
<br>
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Edward Diehl <</font><a href="mailto:edwarddiehl@hotmail.com" target="_blank"><font color="blue" face="Calibri" size="3"><u>edwarddiehl@hotmail.com</u></font></a><font face="Calibri" size="3">>
wrote: </font><font face="Garamond" size="4"><br>
We're on SAPKB70107 - ECC 6.0<br>
<br>
We did a client copy from production to the test system. WF-BATCH
was configured after some test data did not produce workflows. After
that we STILL are not getting workflows. The Events go into the queue,
as designed. When released the events show green, but at the bottom
of the event display under RFC status:<br>
"System overloaded, repeat immediately by batch"<br>
<br>
Okay, so a couple of questions:<br>
Has anyone out there seen this before?<br>
What does system overloaded mean?<br>
And what batch process/program is it talking about?<br>
<br>
Any feedback would be appreciated.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Ed Diehl</font><font face="Calibri" size="3"><br>
</font><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><b><br>
<br>
<br>
Ed Diehl</b></font><font face="Tahoma" size="3"><i><br>
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm."</i> </font><font face="Calibri" size="3"><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
SAP-WUG mailing list</font><font color="blue" size="3"><u><br>
</u></font><a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu"><font color="blue" face="Calibri" size="3"><u>SAP-WUG@mit.edu</u></font></a><font color="blue" size="3"><u><br>
</u></font><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank"><font color="blue" face="Calibri" size="3"><u>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</u></font></a><font face="Calibri" size="2"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
SAP-WUG@mit.edu</font><font color="blue" size="3"><u><br>
</u></font><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank"><font color="blue" face="Calibri" size="2"><u>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</u></font></a><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><br>
<br>
<br>
Unless stated otherwise above:<br>
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598. <br>
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU</font><font face="Calibri" size="3"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________ SAP-WUG mailing list SAP-WUG@mit.edu
</font><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank"><font color="blue" face="Calibri" size="3"><u>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</u></font></a><tt><font size="2">_______________________________________________<br>
SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
SAP-WUG@mit.edu</font></tt><font color="blue" size="3"><u><br>
</u></font><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank"><tt><font color="blue" size="2"><u>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</u></font></tt></a><font size="3"><br>
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><br>
<br>
Unless stated otherwise above:<br>
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598. <br>
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU</font><tt><font size="2">_______________________________________________<br>
SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
SAP-WUG@mit.edu<br>
</font></tt><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank"><tt><font size="2">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</font></tt></a><tt><font size="2"><br>
</font></tt>
<br><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><br>
Unless stated otherwise above:<br>
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598. <br>
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU<br>
</font><br>_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</div> </div></body>
</html>