<font size=2 face="sans-serif">Hi all,</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">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 size=2 face="sans-serif"><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 size=2 face="sans-serif">
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 size=2 face="sans-serif"><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 size=2 face="sans-serif"><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 size=2 face="sans-serif">Best Regards,<br>
James Johnson<br>
<br>
E-mail:JJohnson@uk.ibm.com<br>
Mobile: 07908715224 or 07920870270</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">From:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">James Johnson/UK/IBM@IBMGB</font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">To:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"SAP Workflow
Users' Group" <sap-wug@mit.edu>, </font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Date:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">11/09/2013 11:30</font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Subject:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">RE: Event Raised
- WF-BATCH Configured - No Workflow</font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Sent by:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</font>
<br>
<hr noshade>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Hi Ed,</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><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 size=2 face="sans-serif"><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 size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
From: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Edward
Diehl <edwarddiehl@hotmail.com></font><font size=3> </font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
To: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"SAP
Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug@mit.edu>, </font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Date: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">10/09/2013
19:22</font><font size=3> </font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Subject: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">RE:
Event Raised - WF-BATCH Configured - No Workflow</font><font size=3> </font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Sent by: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</font><font size=3>
<br>
</font>
<hr noshade><font size=3><br>
<br>
</font><font size=4 face="Garamond"><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 size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=2 face="Tahoma"><b><br>
<br>
Ed Diehl</b></font><font size=3 face="Tahoma"><i><br>
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm."</i> </font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
<br>
</font><font size=3><br>
<br>
</font>
<hr><font size=3 face="Calibri">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 size=2 face="sans-serif"><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 size=3 face="Calibri"> <br>
<br>
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
From: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Rick
Bakker <rbakker@gmail.com></font><font size=3 face="Calibri"> </font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
To: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"SAP
Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug@mit.edu>, </font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Date: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">09/09/2013
23:28</font><font size=3 face="Calibri"> </font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Subject: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re:
Event Raised - WF-BATCH Configured - No Workflow</font><font size=3 face="Calibri">
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Sent by: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</font><font size=3 face="Calibri">
</font><font size=3><br>
</font>
<hr noshade><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
<br>
<br>
Hello Ed, <br>
<br>
Try OSS </font><font size=1 color=#2f2f2f face="Arial">Note 1025249 - Entries
in transaction SM58 "hang"</font><font size=3 face="Calibri">
</font><font size=1 color=#2f2f2f face="Arial"><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 size=3 face="Calibri">
</font><font size=1 color=#2f2f2f face="Arial"><br>
<br>
regards</font><font size=3 face="Calibri"> </font><font size=1 color=#2f2f2f face="Arial"><br>
Rick</font><font size=3 face="Calibri"> <br>
<br>
<br>
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Edward Diehl <</font><a href=mailto:edwarddiehl@hotmail.com target=_blank><font size=3 color=blue face="Calibri"><u>edwarddiehl@hotmail.com</u></font></a><font size=3 face="Calibri">>
wrote: </font><font size=4 face="Garamond"><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 size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=2 face="Tahoma"><b><br>
<br>
<br>
Ed Diehl</b></font><font size=3 face="Tahoma"><i><br>
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm."</i> </font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
SAP-WUG mailing list</font><font size=3 color=blue><u><br>
</u></font><a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu"><font size=3 color=blue face="Calibri"><u>SAP-WUG@mit.edu</u></font></a><font size=3 color=blue><u><br>
</u></font><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target=_blank><font size=3 color=blue face="Calibri"><u>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</u></font></a><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
SAP-WUG@mit.edu</font><font size=3 color=blue><u><br>
</u></font><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target=_blank><font size=2 color=blue face="Calibri"><u>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</u></font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><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 size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________ SAP-WUG mailing list SAP-WUG@mit.edu
</font><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug"><font size=3 color=blue face="Calibri"><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 size=3 color=blue><u><br>
</u></font><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug"><tt><font size=2 color=blue><u>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</u></font></tt></a><font size=3><br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><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"><tt><font size=2>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>
</font></tt>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><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>