AW: Workflow condition step returns wrong value

[Patrik vanOdijk]

Thorsten, Sarah.
 
I agree with what you say Thorsten. We did the workflow branch solution and saw
alot of RFC's. We changed that to a checkfunction and the load did go down
drastically. This is ofcourse depending on the type of workflow, the number of
flows started and the percentage of flows that are terminated ofcourse.
 
One issue that also needs to be adressed concerning this is a problem with
synchronisation. In some applications the, for example CREATED, event is
triggered before the database update has been done. This means that the access
to the object is not succesful in the check function. Sometimes this works with
the first solution Sarah suggests since the slowness of the RFC could alow the
database update to finish, but that doesn't seem like a very stabil solution
really.
 
We had to build an exit for one application to check a status for one created
object and skip the triggering of the created event within the application
instead of with the check function just of the above described problem.
 
Whats your opinion on this?
 
/Patrik
 
 
 
 
"Dr. Thorsten Wewers" <thorsten.wewers at bmt-consulting.de> on 2000-09-28 16:34:10
 
Please respond to "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
 
To:   SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
cc:    (bcc: Patrik van Odijk/GBG/FRONTEC)
 
Subject:  AW: Workflow condition step returns wrong value
 
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
Sarah,
 
there is one issue I'd like to address in this context (it doesn't help=
 you
with your current problem, but it avoids your running into another one =
in
the future): If I understand your description correctly, your workflow
starts with a simple condition and immediately ends in one branch of th=
at
condition. Doing so, you are creating a lot of flowitems and transactio=
nal
RFCs, i.e. you're bringing a lot of load onto your machine, load that i=
s
really unnecessary (namely, for all those workflows that end immediatel=
y). A
way to avoid this, is to work with check function modules in the event
coupling table: In the function module, you simply evaluate the conditi=
on in
ABAP (reading e.g. your defined property with swc_get_property etc.) an=
d
raise an exception if you don't want the workflow to be started. The bi=
g
advantage is that this check function module runs in the same context a=
s the
event raiser, i.e. no tRFC involved. This costs way less performance on=
 your
machine. Please consider that every tRFC is a new logon - you know how =
long
it takes to log on in SAP as a dialog user...
 
Best regards,
 
Thorsten Wewers
http://www.bmt-consulting.de
 
 
-----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
Von: SAP Workflow [mailto:Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU]Im Auftrag von
Jackson, Sarah A
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. September 2000 15:05
An: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Betreff: Workflow condition step returns wrong value
 
 
Hi,
 
I am working with version 46b and am working on a workflow to do the
following - when an external applicant is created and a reference emplo=
yee
is available, a mail notification should be sent to that reference empl=
oyee.
The object type 'applicant' did not contain the attributes reference
employee available or reference employee, therefore I have created a su=
btype
and assigned those attributes to it. This all seems to be working fine.=
 In
the workflow, the first step is a condition step that says if applicant=
 is
external and reference employee is available, send mail notification. (=
if
Applicant.Internal External =3D 'AP' and Applicant.Reference Available =
=3D 'X',
send mail) If false, workflow ends. I have set up the condition, but wh=
en I
try to test the workflow, the condition step always returns the value f=
alse
and terminates immediately. I have created a number of applicants who a=
re
external and do have reference employees yet still get return value fal=
se. I
have tried testing the condition step with just the applicant number as=
 the
condition, and then using that applicant, yet still get the value false=
. Any
ideas on this would be greatly appreciated!
 
Thanks in advance,
 
Sarah Jackson
 
 
 
 
=