Database update incomplete after changedoc event

[Michael Pokraka]

Hi Mark, 
Pretty much my suspicions. I double-checked, the CD is written in a V2 update.
So I also checked the source of the change - hey, the whole thing is
SAP-standard configured stuff! It comes in via RFC... so a possibility is that
the data is created in V2 as well. 

Defo an OSS thing I'd say, but alas, the powers that be have decided that it's
more important to get it working and move on rather than fix it properly (the
usual dilemma that we all face!). So now I have 1 minute requested start in the
WF and a few happy people.

Still, it does throw a bit of a shadow over the CD reliability...
Thanks for the input! 
Cheers
Mike

--- Mark Pyc <markpyc at hotmail.com> wrote:

> G'day Mike,
> 
> In theory all change documents Should be written in V2 updates which Should 
> mean that all other significant updates are already completed via V1 
> updates. But of course Should is a powerful word.
> 
> If the Change Docs are being written in V1 they shouldn't be. If they're 
> done via V2 but the V1 main data is not available then that throws a big 
> spanner in the reliability of SWEC raised events - supposedly the most 
> reliable.
> 
> I've never had troubles with it. I'd be raising it with OSS.
> 
> Have fun,
> Mark
> 
> From: Michael Pokraka <workflow at quirky.me.uk>
> Reply-To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
> To: SAP Workflow User Group <sap-wug at mit.edu>
> Subject: Database update incomplete after changedoc event
> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 03:48:04 -0800 (PST)
> 
> Hi all,
> Quick question (more of an opinion poll): I've an event triggered off a 
> change
> document, but the data is still not available once the WF starts (the first
> step's binding trips over blank attributes). This should not be, how 
> reliable
> are we supposed to consider change docs in terms of up-to-date-ness?
> 
> It's a 5 minute fix to put a delay into a check FM, but.... that's ugly and
> half the point of events is that we're supposed to be able to rely on DB
> consistency. If it's supposed to be reliable then I'd rather get OSS to look 
> at
> it. Oh, I did check, the attribute is based on a table that's included in 
> the
> changedoc.
> 
> Any input appreciated,
> Cheers
> Mike
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 
>