Container Persistence

[Alon Raskin]

Makes sense. Thanks Mark. 


Alon Raskin
e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com
p: +61 3 9625 2189 (Head Office)
f:  +61 3 8610 1239 
c:  +1 207 756 0370
w: http://www.3i-consulting.com

-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf Of
Mark Pyc
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 5:46 AM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: Re: Container Persistence

I can agree that SAP could hide all this from us, but as for the key versus
the number it makes sense to me. The key is just that, a key to allow
instantiation which can be stored easily, but it's not an instance. The
number is a reference pointer to where the instance is residing in memory.

Have fun,
Mark 

On 8/30/05, Alon Raskin <araskin at 3i-consulting.com> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Appreciate the response. My experience has been similar to yours. 
> Sometimes when you do a swc_get_elmenet it comes back with an error 
> message saying that there is no object with the particular run time 
> definition (or something like that) and that's when I know its time to 
> dust off the persistence conversion macros.
> 
> Problem is I don't really have a good understand of why this occurs? I 
> understand that SAP has various representations of the objects in a 
> container but what I don't understand is why I need to worry about it. 
> I would have expected SAP to shield us from the various 'internal'
> representations of the container.
> 
> One other related observation. When you look at the container you will 
> see that the data type is either in upper or lower case. This 
> represents persistent and run time references - though don't ask me 
> which is which. As Mark said, if it is persistent you will see the key 
> of the object. If it is run time you will see just a number (that makes no
sense).
> 
> Would be interested to see if others have any further input on this...
> 
> Thanks again Mark.
> 
> Alon Raskin
> e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com
> w: http://www.3i-consulting.com
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On 
> Behalf Of Mark Pyc
> Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 4:59 AM
> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
> Subject: Re: Container Persistence
> 
> G'day Alon,
> 
> You don't need to use them too often at all. I've done it productively 
> maybe twice?? If you debug you can see if the container is persistent or
not.
> Persistent means it's in a state ready to be stored in the DB, so 
> objects are listed with Object Type and Key. When it's in runtime mode 
> objects will have an instance ID rather than a key.
> 
> There is only one place that I did it (receiver type FM or maybe the 
> Change Doc object key adjustment FM) and it was in an older release.
> Basically you needed to convert from Persistent to Runtime, fiddle the 
> contents and then convert back to Persistent.
> 
> Have fun,
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> On 8/30/05, Alon Raskin <araskin at 3i-consulting.com> wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the container 
> > persistence macros. I have seen them used in Alternate Binding FMs 
> > but never truly understood when is the right time to use them. And 
> > in which direction I should be converting (ie. To runtime or to
persistent).
> >
> > I would appreciate anyone's input....
> >
> > Alon
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug