Fork behavior question

[Breslavets, Sergey]

Hi Jocelyn,
 
i absolutely agree with you that using events is the best option to manage
workflows, but if it's only a single-step notification task that has to be
started, direct start might be better option... but of course, a lot depends on
particular business scenario.
 
Thanks,
Sergey
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Dart, Jocelyn [mailto:jocelyn.dart at sap.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 5:03 PM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: Fork behavior question
 
 
Hi Robert/Sergey,
 
I'd suggest Stephan's approach of raising a self-defined event is better
then direct start of a workflow using SWW_WI_START_SIMPLE.
 
As discussed in the book, the minor performance savings gained by starting
workflows
directly do not outweigh the advantages of flexibility and control given by
using events.  Starting workflows directly should only be used when using
a batch job to start a large number of workflows in a very short space of time
or where you have a very high volume workflow situation such that you need to
grab
every performance saving dribble you can.
 
Even if you do have a very high volume situation, using the event queue to
deliver
events should be the first port of call before resorting to direct start of
workflows.
 
I've also several times successfully used the technique Stephan has suggested.
 
 
Regards,
        Jocelyn Dart
Consultant (SRM, EBP, Workflow)
and co-author of the book
"Practical Workflow for SAP"
SAP Australia
email: jocelyn.dart at sap.com
phone: +61 412 390 267
fax:   +61 2 9935 4880
 
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Breslavets, Sergey [mailto:Sergey.Breslavets at anheuser-busch.com]
Sent: Thursday, 12 December 2002 5:19 AM
To: SAP-WUG at mitvma.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Fork behavior question
 
 
Hi Robert,
 
you might want also consider sending email notification (with the application
document as an attachment) instead of workitem - this will not hold up your
flow.
 
Or, if you still need to use workitem-type notification, use secondary flow
(single-step task) as Stephan suggested. In this case I would recommend you to
start your notification task directly using SWW_WI_START_SIMPLE, instead of
raising an events... It's more efficient performance-wise.
 
Hope this helps,
Sergey
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Pokraka [mailto:workflow at quirky.me.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 11:44 AM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: Fork behaviour question
 
 
Stephan's suggestion is what you want if this step is still required after the
WF completes and if it doesn't matter whether it's done or not.
 
An alternative is to simply use a fork which terminates right at the end of the
WF when both branches are complete. This obviously also only works if you're not
in a loop structure. In some cases this may be desirable as it keeps things a
bit 'neater'. You couls even model a longish deadline to make the task simply
expire after a while - thus still completing the WF in the end.
 
HTH
Cheers
Mike
 
 
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 06:17:36PM +0100, Becker Stephan (extern) wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> Raise a self-defined workflow event in the main workflow (and pass the data
you need in the event parameter container), which then starts another workflow
that in turn sends the tasks that display the notifications.
>
> Hth,
> Stephan
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Verlaat, Robert [mailto:Robert.Verlaat at PWN.NL]
> Sent: Mittwoch, 11. Dezember 2002 17:11
> To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Fork behaviour question
>
> Dear All,
>
> I'am trying to create the following:
>
> At a certain point in my Workflow a Task is created and I want the
> Workflow to continue directly(without having executed the Task).
>
> So a Fork doesn't work(cancelles the branch..)
> A subworkflow waits...
>
> The functional reason for this is that a user can determine other users
> who should be notified. The notification is a
> Task(BUS2000126.displayarchivedocuments). After this notification the
> Workflow should continue directly because it doesn't has to wait for the
> notifications...
>
> Does anyone knows a Trick/workaround for this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Robert Verlaat
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
_____________
> This outbound message from KPN has been checked for all known viruses by KPN
IV-Scan, powered by MessageLabs.
>
> Bezoek de Website van PWN: http://www.pwn.nl/
>
________________________________________________________________________________
_____________