Inconsistent behavior between SAP Rule and underlying Agent D etermination function module

[Dart, Jocelyn]

Partha,=20
You should not be using include <CNTAIN>.  The correct include to use =
is <CNTN01>. =20
This could well be your problem as it changes how the macros are =
interpreted.=20
 
For the rest - make sure you use the EXACT same container element names =
as specified in the rule - assume
case sensitivity.  Don't clear or refresh AC_CONTAINER.=20
 
Raise the exception NOTHING_FOUND if ACTOR_TAB is still initial after =
your ENDSELECT.
 
Read the doco and look at the tutorials on creating function module =
rules in both the SAP Library doco and in the book if you have it.=20
 
Rgds,
Jocelyn =20
 
-----Original Message-----
From: SAP Workflow [mailto:Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of =
Chatterjee, Partha (US - San Ramon)
Sent: Friday,30 July 2004 4:16 AM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: Inconsistent behavior between SAP Rule and underlying =
Agent Determination function module
 
 
Hi Serge,
=20
Yes those are the macros I used.  My code in the funciton module is =
below:
=20
INCLUDE <CNTAIN>.
 
DATA BEGIN OF ORG_OBJECT OCCURS 0.
 
INCLUDE STRUCTURE SWHACTOR.
 
DATA END OF ORG_OBJECT.
 
DATA: ORG_TYPE LIKE SWHACTOR-OTYPE.
 
DATA: ORG_ID LIKE SWHACTOR-OBJID.
 
DATA: RESULT_TAB LIKE SWHACTOR OCCURS 0 WITH HEADER LINE.
 
REFRESH: ACTOR_TAB, RESULT_TAB, ORG_OBJECT.
 
CLEAR: ACTOR_TAB, RESULT_TAB, ORG_OBJECT.
 
* Get the parameters under consideration.
 
SWC_GET_ELEMENT AC_CONTAINER 'plant' plant.
 
SWC_GET_ELEMENT AC_CONTAINER 'logentrytype' logentrytype.
 
SWC_GET_ELEMENT AC_CONTAINER 'eventdate' eventdate.
 
* Get the position ids from role resolution.
 
select * from ZSSE0017ROLETBL
 
into corresponding fields of result_tab
 
where iaplant =3D plant
 
and iatype =3D logentrytype
 
and begda <=3D eventdate
 
and endda >=3D eventdate.
 
actor_tab-otype =3D result_tab-otype.
 
actor_tab-objid =3D result_tab-objid.
 
append actor_tab.
 
endselect.
 
REFRESH: AC_CONTAINER.
 
CLEAR: AC_CONTAINER.
 
As you can see, its pretty simple code.  I was playing around with =
container refreshes thinking that that maybe the problem but I don't =
think it is.
=20
Best regards,
Partha
 
        -----Original Message-----=20
        From: SAP Workflow on behalf of Serge Boulay=20
        Sent: Thu 7/29/2004 2:09 PM=20
        To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU=20
        Cc:=20
        Subject: Re: Inconsistent behavior between SAP Rule and =
underlying Agent Determination function module
=09
=09
 
        Hi Partha,
=09
        Do you use SWC_GET_ELEMENT AC_CONTAINER... statement in you =
function module
        in order to get these container elements into you function =
module variables?
=09
        Best regards.
=09
        Serge
=09
        -----Message d'origine-----
        De : SAP Workflow [mailto:Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU] De la =
part de
        Chatterjee, Partha (US - San Ramon)
        Envoy=E9 : 29 juillet 2004 12:37
        =C0 : SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
        Objet : Re: Inconsistent behavior between SAP Rule and =
underlying Agent
        Determination function module
=09
        Hi Mike,
=09
        I am not sure I understand your terminology.
=09
        On PFAC_DIS, I click the simulate button (the abacus type =
symbol).  At this
        point, I get a pop-up which allows me to enter my custom =
container elements
        (Plant, Event Date, and Incident Type which are from the EH&S =
area).  After
        enter the custom container elements, I click the test button =
(wrench
        symbol) and get the problem I am speaking about.  If I run the =
same test
        with the underlying function module under se37 it works fine =
and I get the
        Agents I am expecting in ACTOR_TAB.
=09
        I am not sure what the Org Management or the Extended Object ID =
have to do
        with this?  So I guess answer to your question would be no as =
the parameters
        I am feeding the Rule do not have anything to with Org =
Management.
=09
        Best regards,
        Partha
=09
                -----Original Message-----
                From: SAP Workflow on behalf of Mike Nickson
                Sent: Thu 7/29/2004 11:53 AM
                To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
                Cc:
                Subject: Re: Inconsistent behavior between SAP Rule and =
underlying
        Agent Determination function module
              =20
              =20
=09
                When you are simulating the rule (presumably via PFAC) =
there are 2
                possible ways to supply the parameters.
              =20
                Either via - Org Management Object =3D USBLOGGSF
              =20
                Or via - Extended Object ID =3D BLOGGSF   &   Object =
Type =3D US
              =20
                Are these the parameters youa re using ?
              =20
                Mike
              =20
              =20
              =20
              =20
              =20
                "Chatterjee, Partha (US - San Ramon)" =
<pchatterjee at DELOITTE.com>
                Sent by: SAP Workflow <Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
                29/07/2004 15:34
                Please respond to SAP Workflow Users' Group
              =20
              =20
                        To:     SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
                        cc:
                        Subject:        Inconsistent behavior between =
SAP Rule and
        underlying Agent Determination
                function module
              =20
              =20
                Hi All,
              =20
                I have developed a very simple rule that picks some =
agents from a
        custom
                table.  When I execute the function module underlying =
the rule in
                test/debug, the function module always behaves as =
expected returning
        the
                correct result to ACTOR_TAB.  However, if I simulate =
the rule I get
        'No
                Agent Found'.  I don't quite understand what is =
happening between
        the
                two places.  We are on 4.7 extension set 2.
              =20
                Has anyone run into this type of problem before?  The =
only relevant
        note
                I can find is 707767 but it is hard to know from the =
minimal problem
                description whether its appropriate.
              =20
                Also, where is the place to search for q&a's on this =
forum.
              =20
                Best regards,
              =20
                > Partha Chatterjee
                >
              =20
              =20
              =20
                This message (including any attachments) contains =
confidential
        information
                intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is =
protected by
        law.
                If you are not the intended recipient, you should =
delete this
        message. Any
                disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, =
or the taking
        of any
                action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
              =20
=09
=09
=09
=09
        This message (including any attachments) contains confidential =
information
        intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is =
protected by law.  If
        you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this =
message.  Any
        disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the =
taking of any
        action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
=09
 
 
 
 
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential =
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is =
protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you should =
delete this message.  Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this =
message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly =
prohibited.