Task stalled when WF triggered from Portal
Dart, Jocelyn
jocelyn.dart at sap.com
Wed Jan 11 18:12:40 EST 2006
Tuan Huynh,
Any chance you are using PCRs or ISRs with your notification? In which
case
the BUS7051.Created event may have been raised before the form data was
saved.
If the first step in your workflow expects the form data to be there
then that
could be the problem.
There are some notes on PCRs to add some delay to make sure the form
data is saved,
but I generally create a catcher workflow to pick up any notification
without form
data, wait a couple of minutes and try again. If its still not there at
that point there's
something more serious gone wrong so just error out - no point in
retrying.
Regards,
Jocelyn Dart
Senior Consultant
SAP Australia Pty Ltd.
Level 1/168 Walker St.
North Sydney
NSW, 2060
Australia
T +61 412 390 267
M + 61 412 390 267
E jocelyn.dart at sap.com
http://www.sap.com
The information contained in or attached to this electronic transmission
is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended only for
the person or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any distribution,
copying, review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this
electronic transmission or the information contained in it is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error,
please immediately contact the sender to arrange for the return of the
original documents.
Electronic transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure and
accordingly, the sender does not accept liability for any such data
corruption, interception, unauthorized amendment, viruses, delays or the
consequences thereof.
Any views expressed in this electronic transmission are those of the
individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the
sender is authorized to state them to be the views of SAP AG or any of
its subsidiaries. SAP AG, its subsidiaries, and their directors,
officers and employees make no representation nor accept any liability
for the accuracy or completeness of the views or information contained
herein. Please be aware that the furnishing of any pricing information/
business proposal herein is indicative only, is subject to change and
shall not be construed as an offer or as constituting a binding
agreement on the part of SAP AG or any of its subsidiaries to enter into
any relationship, unless otherwise expressly stated.
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
Of Tuan Huynh
Sent: Wednesday, 11 January 2006 1:15 PM
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Subject: Task stalled when WF triggered from Portal
Hi Folks,
I have a WF that starts properly via BUS7051 event created. When I
simulated the triggering within R/3
Using SWUE, my first task which is a background task started and
completed
properly, however, when It is
Triggered through the Portal, this task gets in a "in process" or
"started"
status and it just sits there.
It seems waiting for something.... Which of course stalled the WF.
Testing
of the method invoved works
Just fine. I'm running out of idea on where to check...The event
started
properly, the WF started properly,
When this background task started, it doesn't go further than "in
process"...
Any help is muchly appreciated.
Thanks,
Tuan Huynh
Tuan.huynh at alcatel.com
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
Of
sap-wug-request at mit.edu
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 11:50 AM
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Subject: SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 14, Issue 18
Send SAP-WUG mailing list submissions to
sap-wug at mit.edu
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sap-wug-request at mit.edu
You can reach the person managing the list at
sap-wug-owner at mit.edu
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of SAP-WUG digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Role resolution using responsibilities (Mike Pokraka)
2. How to access ad-hoc objects in class methods (Mike Pokraka)
3. RE: Role resolution using responsibilities (Alon Raskin)
4. RE: Role resolution using responsibilities (Mike Pokraka)
5. RSWUWFML2 - External mail notification (Balasubramanian)
6. Workflow Start Transactions vs Start Forms (Munday,Sherie J.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:45:57 -0000 (GMT)
From: "Mike Pokraka" <wug.replies at workflowconnections.com>
Subject: Re: Role resolution using responsibilities
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<50705.194.215.164.125.1136893557.squirrel at secure.workflowconnections.co
m>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Hi Akshay,
Indicator: Personal Rules
Rules with responsibilities can be personal or function-based. In
the
case of personal rules, responsibilities are only relevant if users
or
persons are assigned directly. In the case of function-based rules,
responsibilities are inherited along the organizational structure.
In other words, personal means you need to assign the agents directly,
not
using org units or whatever. I have no idea why it's there, never used
it.
Possibly to force people to assign individual users instead of getting
lazy
and assigning a whole org unit.
Cheers
Mike
akshay.bhagwat at wipro.com wrote:
>
> Hi All,
> I have doubt related to one of the check box while creating the role
> using responsibilities.
> Pls. let me know the significance of check box for - " Personal role"
> i.e when to use it and when not relevant.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Regards,
> Akshay
>
>
>
>
> The information contained in this electronic message and any
> attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
> addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged
> information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
> immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any
attachments.
>
> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient
> should check this email and any attachments for the presence of
viruses.
> The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
> transmitted by this email.
>
> www.wipro.com_______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:10:21 -0000 (GMT)
From: "Mike Pokraka" <wug.replies at workflowconnections.com>
Subject: How to access ad-hoc objects in class methods
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Message-ID:
<14863.194.215.164.125.1136895021.squirrel at secure.workflowconnections.co
m>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
G'Day folks,
Simple question: How can one access Ad Hoc objects of a task in a
class-based method?
In traditional BOR methods, "SWC_GET_ELEMENT container
<name-in-calling-workflow>..." does the trick, but class methods have no
container. So where is it?
Cheers
Mike Pokraka
Senior Consultant
Workflow Connections Ltd.
Mobile: +44 (0)7786 910 855
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:15:47 -0500
From: "Alon Raskin" <araskin at 3i-consulting.com>
Subject: RE: Role resolution using responsibilities
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<30DFBDC75CD5494CBE4C4D408251BF0307144F98 at ms07.mse2.exchange.ms>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
It's a funny one Mike because I always considered it bad practice to
assign
User IDs directly to a responsibility. I would be interested to hear
from
anyone else as to why you would want to take this approach.
Regards,
Alon Raskin
e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com <mailto:araskin at 3i-consulting.com>
p: +1 207 409 4983 (please note new number)
f: +61 3 8610 1239
w: http://www.3i-consulting.com
________________________________
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu on behalf of Mike Pokraka
Sent: Tue 1/10/2006 06:45
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: Re: Role resolution using responsibilities
Hi Akshay,
Indicator: Personal Rules
Rules with responsibilities can be personal or function-based. In
the
case of personal rules, responsibilities are only relevant if users
or
persons are assigned directly. In the case of function-based rules,
responsibilities are inherited along the organizational structure.
In other words, personal means you need to assign the agents directly,
not
using org units or whatever. I have no idea why it's there, never used
it.
Possibly to force people to assign individual users instead of getting
lazy
and assigning a whole org unit.
Cheers
Mike
akshay.bhagwat at wipro.com wrote:
>
> Hi All,
> I have doubt related to one of the check box while creating the role
> using responsibilities.
> Pls. let me know the significance of check box for - " Personal role"
> i.e when to use it and when not relevant.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Regards,
> Akshay
>
>
>
>
> The information contained in this electronic message and any
> attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
> addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged
> information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
> immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any
attachments.
>
> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient
> should check this email and any attachments for the presence of
viruses.
> The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
> transmitted by this email.
>
> www.wipro.com_______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 6255 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20060110/6d07f6d1/a
ttac
hment-0001.bin
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:53:22 -0000 (GMT)
From: "Mike Pokraka" <wug.replies at workflowconnections.com>
Subject: RE: Role resolution using responsibilities
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<40614.194.215.164.125.1136904802.squirrel at secure.workflowconnections.co
m>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Generally bad practice yes, but I've had a few be exceptions. Anything
where
a person is more important than their position.
If Ziggy Stardust should buy property on the Moon because he is an
expert on
Lunar geography then the responsibilty is his regardless of position in
the
org chart and it should follow him if he moves.
Another is our old favourite "it always works like this except for
department Y where Joe does it" (of course falling into the 'bad
practice'
category). More valid is perhaps the exception case where departments
refer
to themselves (everything goes to org unit XYZ except if it's raised by
them
then it should be Mr. Smith).
Still haven't figured out why we need a tickbox to PREVENT anyone using
org
units.... hence I've never used it.
Cheers
Mike
Alon Raskin wrote:
> It's a funny one Mike because I always considered it bad practice to
> assign User IDs directly to a responsibility. I would be interested to
> hear from anyone else as to why you would want to take this approach.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alon Raskin
> e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com <mailto:araskin at 3i-consulting.com>
> p: +1 207 409 4983 (please note new number)
> f: +61 3 8610 1239
> w: http://www.3i-consulting.com
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu on behalf of Mike Pokraka
> Sent: Tue 1/10/2006 06:45
> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
> Subject: Re: Role resolution using responsibilities
>
>
>
> Hi Akshay,
>
> Indicator: Personal Rules
>
> Rules with responsibilities can be personal or function-based. In
the
> case of personal rules, responsibilities are only relevant if
users or
> persons are assigned directly. In the case of function-based
rules,
> responsibilities are inherited along the organizational structure.
>
> In other words, personal means you need to assign the agents directly,
> not using org units or whatever. I have no idea why it's there, never
used
it.
> Possibly to force people to assign individual users instead of getting
> lazy and assigning a whole org unit.
>
> Cheers
> Mike
>
> akshay.bhagwat at wipro.com wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>> I have doubt related to one of the check box while creating the role
>> using responsibilities.
>> Pls. let me know the significance of check box for - " Personal role"
>> i.e when to use it and when not relevant.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Akshay
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The information contained in this electronic message and any
>> attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
>> addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged
>> information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not
>> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
>> immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any
>> attachments.
>>
>> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient
>> should check this email and any attachments for the presence of
viruses.
>> The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
>> transmitted by this email.
>>
>> www.wipro.com_______________________________________________
>> 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
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:16:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Balasubramanian <pbala_1996 at yahoo.com>
Subject: RSWUWFML2 - External mail notification
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Message-ID: <20060110161621.68340.qmail at web51409.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi All,
Best wishes for the New Year.
I have a question regarding the RSWUWFML2, which send a notification
about
a workitem to the external mail. For some reasons, it takes a while to
reach
the external mail. Is there a way, we can improve the speed of delivery
from
the SAP Server to external email server.
Please write your ideas.
Thanks in advance,
Bala.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your
hands
ASAP.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20060110/bd966b83/a
ttac
hment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:50:12 -0500
From: "Munday,Sherie J." <MUNDAYSJ at airproducts.com>
Subject: Workflow Start Transactions vs Start Forms
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<43ADE045B291B240BAA1252FF11E8313052C2191 at us0368exmp.america.apci.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello Fellow Workflowers,
We are upgrading from 4.6C to ECC 5.0. Our start transactions were not
carried over to the new version of the workflows. I am trying to
recreate
the start transactions using Start Forms. My problem is that the old
Start
Transaction bound the object into the workflow, and the Start Form does
not.
For example, if I want to have the user initiate the workflow by
entering
the Position (plan version, position number, and start date), with the
old
Start Transaction, that instance of PDOTYPE_S (position) would then be
validated on the screen and bound into the workflow container. With the
Start Form, I need to use a structure. If I use OBJEC as my structure,
the
individual data elements will automatically bind into the workflow
container, however the associated object is not instantiated. I then
have
to add another step to "findwithoutdialog" to instantiate the object.
Is
there a way to bind a BOT from the start form into the workflow
container
directly without the additional step?
Many Thanks,
Sherie
Sherie Munday
SCC - Workflow Developer
610-481-4354
Mundays at airproducts.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20060110/3353da3d/a
ttac
hment.htm
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
End of SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 14, Issue 18
***************************************
_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
More information about the SAP-WUG
mailing list