Transport leads to "Inconsistent workflow definition"

[Mark Pyc]

Yep they say 'No Probs' in both systems.

Thanks.


On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 14:28:53 +0800, Dart, Jocelyn <jocelyn.dart at sap.com> wrote:
> Mark,
> Have you tried the node correction/block correction options in the menu
> of SWDD?  They do sometimes help.
> 
> Jocelyn
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
> Of Mark Pyc
> Sent: Thursday,24 March 2005 5:16 AM
> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
> Subject: Re: Transport leads to "Inconsistent workflow definition"
> 
> Thanks Partha, but no joy with that I'm affraid.
> 
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 11:47:31 -0600, Chatterjee, Partha (US - San
> Ramon) <pchatterjee at deloitte.com> wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > I remember running into a similar problem in 4.6.  Mine used to keep
> saying something 'Workflow not available in version 0'
> >
> > For this problem, I used to go into the Workflow Builder screen and
> just hit the Check button and come back out.  Once I went back in
> workflow would function correctly.
> >
> > You may have already tried this but it was just a thought.
> >
> > With regards,
> > Partha
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu on behalf of Mark Pyc
> > Sent: Wed 3/23/2005 9:59 AM
> > To: WUG
> > Subject: Transport leads to "Inconsistent workflow definition"
> >
> >
> > G'day Wugers,
> >
> > Version 6.20 patch 41.
> >
> > I'm also raising this with OSS, but I'm open to any suggestions.
> >
> > I have a Workflow which is working in Dev but when transported to QA
> > is giving me grief. Initially when the transports went in the first
> > subflow to be called (either a 1 or 2 stage approval subflow) would
> > fail with message "Inconsistent workflow definition: Node/step number
> > 1 is not available". The long text of error WL377 says to look at the
> > runtime structure and try Block Correction and to look at the contents
> > of tables SWD_STEPS and SWD_NODES. Without really knowing what I'm
> > expecting to see in these tables this gives me no joy (block
> > correction says 'No Probs').
> >
> > I tried a simple reimport of the transports which resulted in the main
> > Workflow suffering exactly the same issue "Inconsistent workflow
> > definition: Node/step number 1 is not available".
> >
> > I next tried generating a new version of each Main and Subflow in Dev
> > and retransporting. This had the effect of fixing the main flow, but
> > again the subflows now fail with the same message.
> >
> > This indicates to me that I'm facing a transport issue. The note
> > 686297 (already mentioned today) has been applied.
> >
> > The long text of WL377 also says to raise an OSS message - so that's
> > just what I'll do.
> >
> > Any takers?
> >
> > Have fun,
> > Mark
> >
> > (what did I say about needing to allow for OSS note application in
> > Development quotes???)
> > _______________________________________________
> > SAP-WUG mailing list
> > SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
> >
> > This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
> information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is
> protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you should
> delete this message.  Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this
> message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly
> prohibited.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>