Workflow Administrator authorizations

[Mark Pyc]

G'day Jim,

So the sitch is that you have background steps that don't complete but
also don't error? Firstly I'd say to fix the underlying problem.

Secondly you can force the background step and Workflow into error and
then restart via SWPR so that the step is executed via WF-BATCH as it
should be. If you're not already familiar with how to force the error,
search the archives as it has been discussed often in the last 3 - 4
months.

Have fun,
Mark

On 4/21/05, Hall, Jim <Jim.Hall at fortisalberta.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Mark:
> 
> We have similar issues here, as Claude's.   Our WF admin authorization is a
> cloned version of the SAP delivered role.
> 
> So, if you have a workflow that is stuck, and needs to be nudged manually,
> by executing background item, for example.
> 
> If the WF administrator does not have the authorization for the back ground
> task, how can one push it forward.
> 
> We have many ISU related tasks that run as background processes.  As
> administrator I can not push these forward, as I have no access.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jim Hall 
> Systems Analyst
> Fortis Alberta Inc.
> Information Technology 
>  
> Jim.Hall at fortisalberta.com 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> G'day Claude,
> 
> I can't give you the specifics you're after but I can tell you that I
> wouldn't encourage SAP_ALL or anything close for a WF admin.
> 
> WF-BATCH should have SAP_ALL but that's an entirely seperate matter since
> it's a batch user that no-one can log on as.
> 
> WF Admin really only needs access to WF Admin transactions (SWI1, SWI2..,
> SWIA, SWU_OBUF, etc.) plus SM58 which is one that gets forgotten often. But
> the WF Admin should not need any functional transactions. Just because
> you've got a WF that deals with FI Docs it doesn't mean that the WF Admin
> needs FB01 or FB02.
> 
> The WF Admin in my opinion should never do other peoples work for them. They
> are there to assist the process. Sometimes they need to give the process a
> good kick (so you do need all authorization for manipulating work items) but
> you don't need access to the underlying Functional Transactions.
> 
> That's my 2p.
> 
> Have fun,
> 
> Mark
> 
> On 4/21/05, Claude Bourque <claude_bourque at hc-sc.gc.ca> wrote:
> 
> > Greetings,
> 
> > 
> 
> > We've run across a few roadblocks recently were security wants to 
> 
> > severely limit the Workflow Administrator's user id.
> 
> > 
> 
> > Although we've pointed out the SAP-delivered roles/profiles, nothing 
> 
> > seems to be moving.
> 
> > 
> 
> > Can anyone share with me what kind of authorizations your 
> 
> > administrators have been given? I'm assuming some kind of modified
> SAP_ALL.
> 
> > 
> 
> > PS: We had the same problem a while back with WF-BATCH.
> 
> > 
> 
> > Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> > 
> 
> > We're on 4.7 Basis 6.2.
> 
> > 
> 
> > Thanks and have a great day.
> 
> > 
> 
> > Claude Bourque
> 
> > HR/Workflow Consultant
> 
> > Health Canada
> 
> > 
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> 
> > SAP-WUG mailing list
> 
> > SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> 
> > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
> 
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> 
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> 
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
> _______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
> 
> 
>