Workflow Container Limiations & Design Considerations

[Ravi Dixit]

 Hi Eneko

You don't need to hold any of such data in the container but save them to
the back end as Long/Standard texts. A JWD application we used similarly did
not have any performance issues with handling large amount of
comments/descriptions, etc.

-- 
Best Regards
Ravi Dixit

Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 11:34:17 +0800
> From: <eneko.bilbao at accenture.com>
> Subject: Workflow Container Limiations & Design Considerations
> To: <sap-wug at mit.edu>
> Message-ID:
>        <
> CD75E1D308A1964B9A8F210DDDBB57910132FBBD at APAXM1106.dir.svc.accenture.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello All,
>
>
>
> I'm looking for some design considerations and recommendation regarding
> workflow.
>
>
>
> We have a client who is asking for very complicated workflows, (6-14+
> steps!!) with a large amount of data stored in the workflow container.
> The requirement is for each recipient to add approximately 1 page of
> data, (comments, recommendations, reviews etc) to the workflow. At the
> end of this workflow they would like all of this data posted to some
> custom HR Infotypes. However, the client does not want to access and
> process these "essays" in the GUI only in the UWL.
>
>
>
> My questions are regarding technical limitations of SAP and possible
> negative impacts of the above approach.
>
>
>
> Can the workflow container handle this amount of data? Would you
> recommend storing this data in the container? If not, why not? Can the
> UWL display this much data? What are some possible alternative
> approaches we could recommend?
>
>
>
> Any suggestions would be welcome.
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
> Eneko Bilbao
>
> Email: eneko.bilbao at accenture.com mailto:eneko.bilbao at accenture.com<eneko.bilbao at accenture.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20071207/c2a92045/attachment.htm