Confused deadline reactions

[Van Heerde, Arnoud]

Hi Ulrich,
 
This is not a solution, but it may help you to investigate the problem. If
you kill the work item, the status of the work item is forced into
"logically deleted". However you can also set a work item to "logically
deleted" with the change work item function available from the technical
work item display in the business workplace or using the workflow
administration functions... Another way to set a work item to "logically
deleted" could be by modeling an temporary exception for the business object
method, although I have not experienced it myself. In other words: it may be
a good idea to find out who last changed the "original" work item and what
is its current status. If you need more help please let me know.
 
Arnoud
 
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Ulrich Mende [mailto:wug at mende-edv-beratung.de]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 12:05 AM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: Confused deadline reactions
 
 
Hi Arnoud,
yes we use modelled deadline monitoring - I kill the late workitem by a
control step and create a new item for the director. Of course this is no
real forwarding, but for the approver and the director it has the same
effect.
 
Best regards Uli
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Van Heerde, Arnoud <arnoud.van.heerde at sap.com>
To: <SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 8:15 AM
Subject: Re: Confused deadline reactions
 
 
> Hi Ulrich,
>
> I am curious how you forward the work item to the director. Are you using
> modeled deadline monitoring?
>
> Arnoud
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Susan R. Keohan [mailto:skeohan at MIT.EDU]
> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 9:08 PM
> To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Fwd: Confused deadline reactions
>
>
> On behalf of Ulrich Mende (info at MENDE-EDV-BERATUNG.DE)...
> >Hello workflowers,
> >in a productive system 4.5B we have a problem with deadline monitoring of
> >workflows. For an approval step we use both: Lates Starting Date ( LSD)
> >deadline and Latest Ending Date (LED) deadline as well.
> >Modelled reactions:
> >After LSD:  send a reminder mail to the approver (offset = 4 days)
> >After LED:  forward to the director (= boss of the approver) (offset = 9
> >days)
> >We have about 1000 workflows per day and over a period of one year
> >everything worked fine.
> >
> >Now the system was down for 5 days. After the restart hundreds of
workitems
> >were forwarded, what is easy to explain: batch report RSWWDHEX was not
> >running the last 5 days too.
> >But, evidently, report RSWWDHEX now confuses LSD and LED in some (not in
> >all)
> >cases. It forwards workitems which have just reached the LSD, skipping
the
> >reminder mail, while LED is stiil 3 days ahead. The  concerned director
is
> >not amused by his overflowing inbox...
> >The calculation of LSD and LED  is correct, as shown by the workitem
> >details.
> >So I suspect that SWWDHEX under stress behaves not normally...
> >
> >Has anyone of you already faced this problem?
> >
> >Best regards  and thanks  Uli
> >