<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'>Hi all,<BR> <BR>I'm looking for a way to stop the batch dialog popups when processing a document like 'Ok code=...'<BR> <BR>I've created a step in a workflow where you can run a transaction like MIRO, and it takes you through the processing step by step, but I just need to surpress the popups from display.<BR> <BR>I know this is possible as I did it many years ago, but I just can't remember how, I think it was in the user settings possibly parameters?<BR> <BR>Any ideas?<BR> <BR>Thanks,<BR>Shoaib<BR><br> <BR><div><hr id="stopSpelling">Subject: Re: batch vs dialog<br>From: madgambler@hotmail.com<br>To: sap-wug@mit.edu<br>Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 13:51:25 +0100<br>CC: sap-wug@mit.edu<br><br><div><span></span></div><div><div>Hi,</div><div><br></div><div>Presume you're really talking about DIA Work Processes? Worklow's not strictly running in true dialog mode.</div><div><br></div><div>I guess the answer is: it depends. </div><div><br></div><div>Can we assume your 'task' is being started asynchronously?</div><div><br></div><div>If so, have you considered using a fork with an end condition and in a parallel branch to your task add an event listener. Your asynch task could yhen raise this event when it's done. Useful if the thing you're waiting for might not happen for a while. Or if the thing you're waiting for might happen even if your existing step runs into trouble. The event could even be queued and SWEQSRV could push the WF on if volumes are a problem. </div><div><br></div><div>Or, after your existing step add a condition check within a loop and combine this with an end condition and use a wait step (deadline) to trigger another loop pass to see if what you're waiting for has happened. This approach is useful for escalations to catch delays. Of course the onus will be on SWWDHEX Batch Job to pick up the baton. </div><div><br></div><div>So many ways, really. All depends on how quickly you want the WF to follow on the back of your asynchronous task I suppose. </div><div><br></div><div>Then again, if your WF must wait for the Database update to occur /before/ it is allowed to proceed and no delay is expected then it's not out of the question to enforce a COMMIT WORK AND WAIT inside your step. Especially handy if the step is going to affect the runtime object instance the WF is working with. Not pretty, but effective.</div><div><br></div><div>Mike GT<br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On 5 Jun 2013, at 13:07, "Robert van den Berg " <<a href="mailto:wug@bergtop-ict.nl">wug@bergtop-ict.nl</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote><div>
Hi all,<BR>
<BR>
we have a workfow which has a task which takes longer than the dialog time to complete.<BR>
Is it possible to execute a task in a batch proces?<BR>
<BR>
As I recall, all workflow steps are executed in a dialog process, but I want to make sure there is no other option.<BR>
<BR>
Kind regards,<BR>
Robert<BR></div></blockquote><blockquote><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>SAP-WUG mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a></span><br><span><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a></span><br></div></blockquote></div><br>_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug<br>_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</div> </div></body>
</html>