Commit Work

[Edward Diehl]

Hi Alon,
I try to always use a BDC function to create a new object rather than a BAPI.  A BAPI, if it is not called as an RFC, required an explicit COMMIT WORK.  It may be some defect in my understanding, but I am not a big fan of BAPIs for several reasons and this is just one of them.
 
Regards,
Ed Diehl


Subject: Commit WorkDate: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 17:09:57 -0400From: araskin at 3i-consulting.comTo: sap-wug at mit.edu

A colleague of mine is having an issue and I wanted to see if anyone has seen this before. I have seen this issue creep up on different implementations so I am sure I am not the first to handle this.
 


Step 1 creates a new document (doesn't matter what it is, its IS-U) by calling a BAPI

The BAPI returns the ID of the new object which can be seen in the container of the Workflow

Step 2 then calls SYSTEM.GenericInstantiate to get an instance of the newly created document

Step 2 errors claiming that the object does not exist.
I suggested to him to uncheck the Advance with Dialog step as I thought that this would 'force' the WF sub-system to do a COMMIT WORK between steps but this did not seem to work. I was sure that the Workflow sub-system always executes a COMMIT WORK between steps. Is that not the case? We did a test, and created a method where all it did was execute a COMMIT WORK. We inserted this step in between the BAPI and the System.GenericInstantiate and everything worked beautifully. So it is definitely a commit issue. Perhaps WF treats methods marked as BAPIs differently to standard methods and doesn't not do an explicit COMMIT WORK? If so, how do people get around this?
Regards,




Alon Raskin
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20070612/d4ce33e9/attachment.htm