Problem transporting workflow template
Shahram Shadmani
shahram.shadmani at alcatel.com
Thu Jun 29 17:23:33 EDT 2006
Hi Mike,
I guess you're experiencing a known bug in SAP R3 if you are not able to
resolve the problem by transaction SWU_OBUF. In that case, there is a
workflow version inconsistency of the container elements. There is an OSS
messages for this issue. If you have this problem and you have done
everything else correctly, you have to send another transport of your
workflow to the target systems. Before, you need to include the container
elements in the transport request as well, since further transports of an
existing workflow don't contain these elements. To include the elements in
the transport just, e.g., delete an existing element, generate the workflow
(you should get an error) and recreate the element and regenerate the
workflow. Now the elements would be in the transport requests as well (you
won't see them as an extra object).
This would resolve your problem!
Regards,
Shahram
-----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: Thursday, June 29, 2006 4:20 PM
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Subject: SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 19, Issue 82
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: SWU_OBUF (kaukabr at yahoo.com)
2. Problem transporting workflow template (Mike.Nickson at boots.com)
3. RE: Race to the Finish Line (Alon Raskin)
4. RE: Worfklow Restart after system crash crashes system
(ironic I know) (Alon Raskin)
5. RE: SOLVED: Generating email from activity in e-recruiting
(Hilsbos, Margaret A)
6. Parallel processing with dynamic user selection (Knoske, George)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:09:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: <kaukabr at yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: SWU_OBUF
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID: <20060629160941.54041.qmail at web53905.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Hello Manish:
Here is the RHWFINDEXRESET THIS PROGRAM IS OF THE TRANSACTION SWU_OBUF, WHAT
IT DOES IT SYNCHRONIZE THE WORKFLOW BUFFERS.
I hope this what you are looking for.
Regards,
AZIZ
--- "Khanna, Manish" <manish.khanna at amd.com> wrote:
> Thanks Jocelyn for the explanation.
>
>
>
> However I too have always observed that new/updated WF definitions
> (sent through transports) are activated only after midnight. Till now
> I had an understanding that this is due to some buffer sync process
> running at midnight everyday.
>
>
>
> However I would like to get rid of this assumption
> if it is not correct.
> Please advice.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Manish
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu
> [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
> Of Dart, Jocelyn
> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 11:22 AM
> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
> Subject: RE: SWU_OBUF
>
>
>
> No this transaction is not run at midnight - the HR
> system runs an
> equivalent function.
>
>
>
> Try function module RH_SWWUSERWI_TIMESTAMP_RESET
>
>
>
> You might be able to put it in an after transport
> method for the
> relevant tables.
>
>
>
>
>
> 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 <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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu
> [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
> Of Nietz, Karl K
> Sent: Thursday, 29 June 2006 3:39 PM
> To: sap-wug at mit.edu
> Subject: SWU_OBUF
>
> Hi,
>
> This transaction is run at midnight in every system
> to refresh workflow
> buffers. However, we need to run it immediately
> after our transports in
> order to avoid integrity confilicts between
> workflows templates and
> tasks.
>
> We can't find the job that submits this transaction
> at midnight, so is
> anybody aware of a jobname or program name that we
> can schedule to
> automatically execute it at the complete of our
> transports. Otherwise
> we would have to create a BDC session to achieve the
> result.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Karl Nietz
> GSAP Workflow Team Leader
> Melbourne
>
> This message and any attached files may contain
> information that is
> confidential and/or subject of legal privilege
> intended only for use by
> the intended recipient. If you are not the intended
> recipient or the
> person responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient,
> be advised that you have received this message in
> error and that any
> dissemination, copying or use of this message or
> attachment is strictly
> forbidden, as is the disclosure of the information
> therein. If you have
> received this message in error please notify the
> sender immediately and
> delete the message.
>
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:21:02 +0100
From: Mike.Nickson at boots.com
Subject: Problem transporting workflow template
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Message-ID:
<OF1D9A9C33.85D657AF-ON8025719C.00559EB6-8025719C.00599195 at bhint.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
We are experiencing a problem when transporting a workflow template from
our development to your QA sytems.
Even though the object (ZBUS7051) and the template are in the same
transport, via SWO1 I am seeing a new attribute (the last one in the list)
which is not visible when viewing the object in the workflow container via
PFTC.
Also when viewing the workflow template in PFTC it is generating random
version numbers (currently up to version 355 when the previous active
version was 5).
When we click the version drop down menu the version numbers have moved on
and are still increasing !
When we test the workflow via SWUD we are seeing a binding error that was
there in a previous version complaining about a missing workflow container
element that workflow seems to have generated itself, and also the binding
contains a duplicate assignment that seems to have been generated by the
workflow because the task continer element was flagged as mandatory.
I have tried retransporting and also generated 2 additional transport to
(with negligable changes in jsut to force a new transport).
Does anyone have any ideas how I can solve this . . . . before I raise an
OSS note.
Mike
SAP BASIS 620 Level 55
SAP HR 470 Level 51
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20060629/1eedeb01/attac
hment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 13:12:49 -0400
From: "Alon Raskin" <araskin at 3i-consulting.com>
Subject: RE: Race to the Finish Line
To: "'SAP Workflow Users' Group'" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<200606291714.k5THEdMt027995 at pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Thanks Mike. Nice one.
To take this idea one step further you could actually do the whole thing
generically so that any business object/workflow could use this generic NQ
workflow.... Hmmm sexy.
Alon Raskin
e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com
p: +1 207 409 4983
f: +1 806 403-4983
The easiest way to integrate SAP with any mobile device
http://www.themobileworkplace.com
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf Of
Mike Pokraka
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 8:56 AM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: Re: Race to the Finish Line
Hi Alon,
If creating a custom table is not an obstacle:
Use a table ZwhateverQUEUE.
The Workflow or trigger function checks this table for the object key.
If found, add some kind of reference to self and any event parameters and
stop. If not found, add ref as well, but continue to run.
When a Workflow has finished with the object in question, it checks the
queue for any other references to the object. If found, trigger a new
Workflow. Then remove self from queue.
There are obviously a couple of minor synchronization/locking details to be
sorted (you could even use an event to trigger the next WF). You could even
use a controller WF to trigger WF's and listen for their 'I'm done' events
before checking the queue - you get the basic idea.
Cheers,
Mike
Alon Raskin wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Problem: I have multiple instances of the same workflow that are triggered
at the same time. Of course, the first thing that happens is that each
instance tries to update the Business Partner (the same one) and this
results in a large number of temporary application errors. This is no big
deal but if I have 50 instances of the WF for the same Business Partner then
I am going to get a lot of errored workflows.
>
> Possible (sucky) solution: One obvious thing I can do to alleviate this
problem is to put in a random wait step and this will hopefully reduce (or
remove) the number of errored workflows. I dont like this solution as I hate
putting in random wait steps unless there is a business need for this.
>
> Can anyone can suggest a better solution?
>
> Look forward to your input.
>
> Alon Raskin
> e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com <mailto:araskin at 3i-consulting.com>
> p: +1 207 409 4983
> f: +1 806 403 4983
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 4
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 13:15:18 -0400
From: "Alon Raskin" <araskin at 3i-consulting.com>
Subject: RE: Worfklow Restart after system crash crashes system
(ironic I know)
To: "'SAP Workflow Users' Group'" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<200606291717.k5THH6fS002563 at pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
How cunning was it? Was it a plan so cunning that you could stick a bushy
tail and pointy ears on it and call it fox?
Anyway I have logged it with SAP (remember I am lazy and cant be bothered
writing my own version of SWPC). I will keep the WUG informed of the
results. But for now beware....
Alon Raskin
e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com
p: +1 207 409 4983
f: +1 806 403-4983
The easiest way to integrate SAP with any mobile device
http://www.themobileworkplace.com
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf Of
Mike Gambier
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 8:51 AM
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Subject: RE: Worfklow Restart after system crash crashes system (ironic I
know)
Alon,
Almost certainly that's a bug with RSWWDHEX that we've had to bypass here
too.
The standard SAP report experiences a lock overflow when it tries to lock
all of the Wait step entries in SWWWIHEAD.
In the end our SAP guy (Trevor Ticehurst, who may know) hatched a cunning
plan to create a copy program that avoided this.
MGT
>From: "Alon Raskin" <araskin at 3i-consulting.com>
>Reply-To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
>To: <sap-wug at mit.edu>
>Subject: Worfklow Restart after system crash crashes system (ironic I
>know)
>Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:43:16 -0400
>
>I have found some peculiar behaviour in transaction SWPC and wanted to
>share it with the group to see if anyone else had experienced this.
>
>
>
>We had a system crash in Production last week which had caused many
>workflows to 'hang'. We have been using transaction SWPC (Restart
>Workflow after system crash) to restart the 'hung' Workflows but SWPC
>has almost crashed our system again!
>
>
>
>Our workflows are mostly hung up on a wait step (which is a background
>step). Using transaction SWPC I noticed that the workflow is restarted
>under the User ID of the user running SWPC. This is fair enough as it
>maintains the audit trial in the WF log as to who restarted the workflow.
>
>
>
>But here is the unfortunate part.
>
>
>
>If I have a 10 step workflow all of which are background. The SWPC
>transaction will execute all of them under my user ID and enqueue every
>work item. The result is for every workflow I restart I get 10 entries
>in the enqueue table. If I have a few hundred workflows to restart, I
>very quickly fill up the NQ table and an overflow occurs. Not good. The
>only time the enqueue locks are released is if I back out of the
transaction.
>IMHO, this should be changed so that the NQ locks are released once the
>workflow has restarted.
>
>
>
>This brings me to the next point:
>
>
>
>I am sure this problem is happening because the advance with dialog
>flag is still set on each step and therefore all 10 steps are being
>executed synchronously. I am curious to hear what you guys do? Do you
>uncheck the advance with dialog flag at the Workflow level (even for
>background
>workflows) or are most people like me (lazy) and tend to forget to
>switch it off?
>
>
>
>BTW, I logged this with OSS.
>
>
>
>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
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:25:55 -0400
From: "Hilsbos, Margaret A" <Margaret.Hilsbos at dayzim.com>
Subject: RE: SOLVED: Generating email from activity in e-recruiting
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<87548400CF397141B3EA2B66CC2F7B9E124D6930 at CORPMAIL1.corp.dayzim.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thanks Alan - but kudos actually go to one of my coworkers, who insisted on
stepping through the configuration document one more time. The document
mentioned that WF-BATCH must have an email address and default printer
specified. Of course we thought, the printer entry won't solve our current
problem, but we should do it anyway. Ha.
Here's hoping this experience helps someone else in the future.
Margaret
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu]On Behalf
Of Rickayzen, Alan
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 7:35 AM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: RE: SOLVED: Generating email from activity in e-recruiting
Well I never!
I about about to suggest creating a problem ticket so kudos to your
impressive detective work that got the problem solved.
Glad it's working now,
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
Of Hilsbos, Margaret A
Sent: Mittwoch, 28. Juni 2006 22:18
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: SOLVED: Generating email from activity in e-recruiting
Okay, problem solved.
You were on the right track with the WF-BATCH suggestion...except it
wasn't the email address that was missing.
Whenever the user WF-BATCH was created, no default printer was entered.
We entered the value LOCL for the printer (Output device) in the
defaults tab of SU01 for WF-BATCH, and it started working. Deleted the
printer value, it stopped working. Put it back in, it works.
Yep, you read that right. PRINTER. So the system can send an email.
I guess there is some logic to that somewhere...
(oh and forgot to mention in my original email, for anyone who wants to
file this away: the system is NW04 (WAS 640) with E-Recruiting 3.0)
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu]On Behalf
Of Hilsbos, Margaret A
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 12:15 PM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: RE: Generating email from activity in e-recruiting
Hi Alan,
1) There is no exception trapped. The workflow completes with all green
lights, no errors or warnings.
2) This is a SAP-delivered task.
3) There is no binding from the task to the method.
4) I searched SAP Notes for the task number and various other terms and
came up empty.
I am not sure how to use technical trace...do you think it's worth the
effort in this case, or is it time to submit a customer message to SAP?
This one is really puzzling me...I appreciate your effort to help!
Margaret
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu]On Behalf
Of Rickayzen, Alan
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 11:40 AM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: RE: Generating email from activity in e-recruiting
Hi Margret,
If you look at the work item generated you should see an exception
message
which explains the reason for failure (assuming that the exception is
trapped). This is a blue "i" button on the technical work item display.
One cause of failure might be that the data that is passed to the task
is
not being passed to the method (e.g. the sendto address). Normally the
task
container is simply copied but if someone has created a binding between
the
task and the method this may be incorrect (technical trace helps locate
this
if an inspection of the binding is not sufficient).
If the task is delivered by SAP then searching SAP Notes for this task
ID
would be the best approach.
Sorry I can't help more (but I'm curious about the outcome).
Best regards,
Alan
_______________________________________________
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: 6
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:21:28 -0400
From: "Knoske, George" <George.Knoske at kaobrands.com>
Subject: Parallel processing with dynamic user selection
To: <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<2783456A70FA1048B0442C066210622A956038 at kbcoh1mx02.kbc.kaobrands.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi All,
We're on ECC6.
I would like to trigger parallel processing of the same task by multiple
users. Each user would make an approve/reject decision on their own.
After all users have responded the workflow will continue down different
paths based on "all approve" or "partial approve" summation. I've read
the archives and see references regarding the usage of multi-line
elements within container operations as a possible option. Is this the
best method available? If so can the users that receive the workitems
be identified dynamically, and if so exactly how do you populate the
multi-line element at the workflow step level at run-time? We plan to
use the ORG structure to identify users. Of course the user-ids
assigned to the ORG structure roles can and will change over time.
Thus, if the user assignment changes the workflow is smart enough to
generate a workitem for the new user. Again, each user must receive the
workitem, and each must act on it independently.
Any help is appreciated.
-------------------
George Knoske
Analyst
Information Technology
Services and Solutions
Kao Brands Company
2535 Spring Grove Ave. Cincinnati, OH 45214
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20060629/4598846f/attac
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 19, Issue 82
***************************************
More information about the SAP-WUG
mailing list