Container Persistence

[Alon Raskin]

Hi Ram,

I think you are right. I just wonder why sometimes I don't have to do the
conversion in the alternate binding FM and sometimes I do. Why does the SAP
Workflow engine pass in different representations? Perhaps it has something
to do with whether there is a WAIT step (and hence the container must be
persisted) or whether the task is executed automatically (even then I would
have thought the task was persisted)... Hmmm.. Not sure.

Thanks Ram for your input.... 

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
Tiwari, Rammanohar
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 6:01 AM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: RE: Container Persistence

Just some more thoughts..

Runtime container used to have the runtime handle ( Hexadecimal number ) of
the program-memory for the object.
So you can't identify an object in database using this runtime handle. It
can only reference the object till the workflow program is in-charge.

Now I think SAP has implemented the auto conversion from Workflow to Task (
Method calls ) but the same is not done for Function Modules used in
alternate binding.

Inside the workflow engine program the runtime handle is used for object
identification but that will not make any sense for the function module and
has to be converted into persistent object first( that can be used to refer
the object in db ).

I think you need to first convert the container to persistent state in case
of ( workflow --> task transfer of data in the function module binding ).
While returning the values, you can make it runtime again and even if you
won't , workflow will automatically convert it to runtime as soon as
container goes back to the workflow program.

Thanks,
Ram


-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu]On Behalf Of
Alon Raskin
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 3:03 PM
To: 'SAP Workflow Users' Group'
Subject: RE: Container Persistence


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


This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended
recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential
information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied,
disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an
intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any
attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.

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