WF Builder gives "Illegal node-id in Nodevalue-Table..."

[Heath, Darrell L.]

We have seen this same error however it was a different scenario.  Our
problem was caused by an "undefined" step that was inadvertently left in
a deadline leg after a process control step. =20
 
Task1 -> Deadline ->....-> Process Control (Task1 Obsolete) ->
"Undefined" -> [end of leg]
 
The process control step marked the parent workitem for the deadline leg
"obsolete".  Then workflow tried to execute the "undefined" step after
that. Same error with no ability to restart or end the step.  We removed
the "undefined" step and all is well.=20
 
Darrell
 
-----Original Message-----
From: SAP Workflow [mailto:Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of
Michael Pokraka
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 5:03 AM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: WF Builder gives "Illegal node-id in Nodevalue-Table..."
 
Thanks, good point but have tried that (never seen that actually fix
anything). We've just carefully rebuilt a 30+ node workflow (ignoring
the
message, then testing the loop still works - no prob so far). Somewhere
near
the end another step was added and the loop stopped working.
 
Not good when a project is cruising at 300mph to try to meet deadlines..
anyway, we've logged it with OSS once again!
 
Cheers
Mike
 
 
Dart, Jocelyn wrote:
> There are a couple of "correction" options e.g. "block correction", in
the
> menu paths of the builder (extras menu I think but they have moved
around
> from release to release). Worth trying before you resort to
rebuilding.
> Regards,
> Jocelyn
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: SAP Workflow [mailto:Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of
> Michael Pokraka
> Sent: Tuesday,9 November 2004 9:38 PM
> To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: WF Builder gives "Illegal node-id in Nodevalue-Table..."
>
> Hi Jocelyn,
>
> The corruption was not immediately apparent, but only happened in
flows that
> encountered this builder 'feature' (Dan is also quite familiar with
this
> one). SWUD and everything else checks out 100% and once the flow is
run we'd
> get 'No successor defined for node nnnnn' and the flow would not enter
the
> loop (the exact point at which the builder spat out the 'Illegal...'
> message). No way to recover or restart. The only way out (apart from
editing
> the tables directly) is to rebuild the flow from scratch.
>
> If nothing else, perhaps it is prudent advice to test that particular
part
> of the flow before continuing build.
>
> Interestingly enough we'd applied some hotpacks and the problem went
away.
> Then we recently went up to patch 44 (620 system) and it seems to be
back
> with a vengeance.
>
> Cheers
> Mike
>
> Dart, Jocelyn wrote:
>> Mike,
>> Never had it do any damage - just save and restart the builder and
all is
>> fine.
>> But report it to OSS - nothing to do with workflow corruption, it's a
>> builder bug.
>> Jocelyn
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: SAP Workflow [mailto:Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of
>> Michael Pokraka
>> Sent: Tuesday,9 November 2004 7:00 AM
>> To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>> Subject: WF Builder gives "Illegal node-id in Nodevalue-Table..."
>>
>> Greetings,
>> Yep, the subject says it all, and I suspect I may have posted about
this
>> one
>> before (6.20/4.7 system).
>>
>> We get the above message when saving a while loop in the workflow
builder
>> -
>> usually repeated three times in the same dialog box with a number
next to
>> it.
>> Does anyone get this and/or have any light to shed on it?
>>
>> I've logged this with OSS before, and the official answer was that
this
>> would take too much time to get to the bottom of. The problem is that
it
>> _sometimes_ causes a workflow corruption (50%?) but the corruption
cannot
>> be
>> reliably reproduced and we should just ignore the message. They
kindly
>> offered to connect in and fix any resulting corrupt workflows when it
>> happens... but honestly, who has time to log a call and wait for SAP
to
>> respond to something logged on a DEV system when all you want/need is
to
>> get
>> a workflow built sometime in the next day or 2.
>>
>> Anyway, rebuilding workflows can get rather frustrating so I thought
I'd
>> ask
>> here once more ... clutching at straws ... any info appreciated.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Mike
>>
>>
>
>