Clearing the Workflow buffer

[Mike Pokraka]

I'm sitting on a 620 site at mo, but have definitively done it in both 640
and 700 systems. Only one option in the menu works in a non-modifiable
system ("Generate..." over here, "Generate and activate" is locked).

Cheers,
Mike

On Thu, June 21, 2007 2:46 pm, Neumann, Marcia wrote:
> Unfortunately in ECC 6 you can't generate a runtime version in a
> non-modifiable system.
>
> Marcia Neumann
> IT Claims Development/Support
>
> Confidentiality notice: The information included in this e-mail,
> including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
> and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
> unauthorized review, use, disclosure, distribution or similar action is
> prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
> sender and delete all copies of the original message immediately.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
> Of Mike Pokraka
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 7:00 AM
> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
> Subject: Re: Clearing the Workflow buffer
>
> Hi Allan,
>
> This sticky behaviour has also made it's way back into 620 with later
> patch levels. My routine is a little simpler and works 99% of the time:
> Following a change, goto the test/config client and
> 1. Run SWU_OBUF
> 2. Open the WF in the WF builder
> 3. Menu: Workflow->Activation->Generate runtime version.
>
> This also works in PRD where I dont't have SE37 access.
> Cheers,
> Mike
>
> On Thu, June 21, 2007 8:06 am, Allan Pearson wrote:
>> Since upgrading to ECC6.0 we have a variation on refreshing WF
> buffers.
>> Changes in the dev. Client are not reflected in the config client
> (same
>> box). OSS gave us the following fix which works;
>>
>>
>>
>> <Quote>
>>
>> Generally you have to use for every changed workflow template such
>> procedure:
>>
>> 1. For example you have changed WSXXX in Version N. You activated it
> in
>>
>> the your development client (RD1_120), but it is not enough now.
>>
>> Now you have to call after that in the client where you start your
>> workflow instances (RD1_111) 3 additional steps:
>>
>> a) SE37 -> Function SWD_WFD_REPLICATE_FROM_9999 for WSXXX and you get
>> the new runtime version N+1
>>
>> b) SWU_OBUF
>>
>> c) SE38 -> RSWDCLRBUF with parameters:
>>
>> Workflow Definition WSXXX Version N (version before activation by
>> function)
>>
>> <EndQuote>
>>
>>
>>
>> Would be nice if somebody knows of a permanent fix so we can stop
> doing
>> this.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Allan Pearson
>>
>> T-Mobile
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----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: 21 June 2007 00:15
>> To: sap-wug at mit.edu
>> Subject: SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 31, Issue 57
>>
>>
>>
>> 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: ABAP OO (Susan R. Keohan)
>>
>>    2. Re: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0
>>
>>       (Paul.Bakker at osr.treasury.qld.gov.au)
>>
>>    3. RE: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0 (Morris, Eddie)
>>
>>    4. Clearing the Workflow buffer (Albina Fernando)
>>
>>    5. RE: Clearing the Workflow buffer (Miller, Jerry)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Message: 1
>>
>> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 16:48:58 -0400
>>
>> From: "Susan R. Keohan" <keohan at ll.mit.edu>
>>
>> Subject: Re: ABAP OO
>>
>> To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
>>
>> Message-ID: <467992BA.1080804 at ll.mit.edu>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>>
>>
>> John,
>>
>>
>>
>> Ask for and you shall receive!
>>
>>
>>
>> We will be fortunate to enjoy a very well done session by one of our
> own
>>
>>
>> (stop blushing Mr. Pokraka) who also presented 'Classy Workflows' at
> the
>>
>>
>> ASUG Annual Conference in Atlanta.  Sadly, Mike's co-speaker, the
> lovely
>>
>>
>> and talented Anna Hill, will not be able to attend, since she works
> for
>>
>> SAP (huh ?  How does that make sense?).  We will miss you Anna!
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Sue
>>
>>
>>
>> John White wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you Jocelyn, and nice work on the blogs!
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Your enthusiasm for ABAP OO is compelling, but sadly, my workflow
>>
>>> experience has only been with BOR. But, I will make an effort to use
>>
>>> this on my next workflow.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Is there a tutorial available? I need some very basic information to
>>
>>> start with! Maybe Sap TechEd 07 in Las Vegas will have a beginners
>>
>>> session?
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Thanks again,
>>
>>>
>>
>>> John
>>
>>>
>>
>>> ________________________________
>>
>>>
>>
>>> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On
>> Behalf
>>
>>> Of Dart, Jocelyn
>>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 2:24 AM
>>
>>> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
>>
>>> Subject: RE: Difference between Business object method and ABAP
>>
>>> classmethodsin atask
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Hi John,
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Actually having worked with both ABAP OO for Workflow and BOR my
>> current
>>
>>> opinion is - only use BOR for eventing if you are using - a standard
>>
>>> workflow as-is or an event technique that doesn't support OO - like
>>
>>> status management events.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Otherwise stick with ABAP OO and link to the existing BOR using an
>>
>>> attribute of type SIBFLPORB.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Best of both worlds.  ABAP OO is soooooooooooooooo much easier to use
>>
>>> for enhancements.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> 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 John White
>>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, 20 June 2007 6:53 AM
>>
>>> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
>>
>>> Subject: RE: Difference between Business object method and ABAP class
>>
>>> methodsin atask
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> I don't know the answer, but here is what I found on SDN. My
>> experience
>>
>>> has only been with BOR object, creating new, and extending existing
>>
>>> ones. Hope this helps!
>>
>>>
>>
>>> BOR objects is the category that have been around for a long time,
>> while
>>
>>> CL is a (relatively) new possibility. You should use whatever is more
>>
>>> practical in each case. For instance, if you are working with
>> employees
>>
>>> and everything you need is in BOR object BUS1065 it makes sense to
> use
>>
>>> that BOR object. If you find a class that has everything you need it
>>
>>> makes (even more) sense to use that.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> If you have to create a completely new object type you should try to
>>
>>> create a class instead of a new BOR object. If you simply need a
>> little
>>
>>> bit of additional functionality or a new virtual attribute, my
>>
>>> recommendation would be to extend the object type that exists instead
>> of
>>
>>> trying to create a class that extends a BOR object.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> and,
>>
>>> ABAP CLASS
>>
>>> Template for objects in ABAP Objects. Defined using CLASS - ENDCLASS
>>
>>> either globally in a class pool or locally in another ABAP program.
>> The
>>
>>> definition of a class is made up of a declaration section for the
>>
>>> declaration of theclass components and animplementation section for
>> the
>>
>>> implementation of the methods.
>>
>>> BOR-OBJECT TYPES
>>
>>> mySAP Technology service and directory of all object types (business
>>
>>> object types, organization object types and technical object types)
> in
>>
>>> hierarchical order.
>>
>>> The object types are each assigned to a packet (and thus indirectly
>> also
>>
>>> to an application component).
>>
>>> Directory of all object types in hierarchical order.
>>
>>> The object types are each assigned a development class (and thus
>>
>>> indirectly also to an application component).
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> ________________________________
>>
>>>
>>
>>> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On
>> Behalf
>>
>>> Of Albina Fernando
>>
>>> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 1:41 PM
>>
>>> To: sap-wug at mit.edu
>>
>>> Subject: Difference between Business object method and ABAP class
>>
>>> methods in atask
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>
>>>
>>
>>>   Can anyone tell me the difference between using Business Object
>> method
>>
>>> and Class methods in the tasks of the Workflow. For eg. When creating
>> a
>>
>>> task we have 2 options. Either Assign a Business Object method or a
>> ABAP
>>
>>> Object class method. So I need to know the difference between the
> two.
>>
>>> And also the advantages of using the two...
>>
>>>   Thanks a lot for all ur support.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Thanks
>>
>>> Albina
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> This email may contain confidential or privileged information for the
>>
>>> intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> do
>>
>>> not use or disseminate the information, notify the sender and delete
>> it
>>
>>> from your system. Thanks
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
> ______________________________________________________________________
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
>>
>>>
>>
>>> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may
>>
>>> contain privileged, confidential, or proprietary information
>>
>>> which may be protected from disclosure under law, and is
>>
>>> intended solely for the use of the individual, group, or entity
>>
>>> to whom this e-mail is addressed.  If you are not one of the
>>
>>> named recipients, please notify the sender by e-mail and
>>
>>> delete this message immediately from your computer.  Any
>>
>>> other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or
>>
>>> copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.  Thank you for
>>
>>> your assistance.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>> SAP-WUG mailing list
>>
>>> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
>>
>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Susan R. Keohan
>>
>> SAP Workflow Developer
>>
>> MIT Lincoln Laboratory
>>
>> 244 Wood Street
>>
>> LI-200
>>
>> Lexington, MA. 02420
>>
>> Phone: 781-981-3561
>>
>> Fax:   781-981-1607
>>
>> keohan at ll.mit.edu
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Message: 2
>>
>> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 07:24:38 +1000
>>
>> From: Paul.Bakker at osr.treasury.qld.gov.au
>>
>> Subject: Re: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0
>>
>> To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
>>
>> Message-ID:
>>
>>
>>
> <OF09F3F4BD.E80E5A8E-ON4A257300.0074E5A7-4A257300.00759B01 at treasury.qld.
>> gov.au>
>>
>>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>>
>>
>> Joanne,
>>
>>
>>
>>  This kind of error occurs during binding, when a source *structure*
> (as
>>
>> opposed to field) in a container does not match a target structure.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it won't be picked up by syntax checks or one-on-one
>>
>> testing, unless you provide both both source and target.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you can pinpoint the step in the workflow where it fails, and
> closely
>>
>> look at the *structure* variables that are in the binding, then you
>> should
>>
>> find the culprit.
>>
>>
>>
>> 'Check'ing the bindings in each step should also help.
>>
>>
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> Paul Bakker
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> |---------+-------------------------------->
>>
>> |         |           "Joanne Johnson"     |
>>
>> |         |           <JoanneJohnson at jo-ann|
>>
>> |         |           stores.com>          |
>>
>> |         |           Sent by:             |
>>
>> |         |           sap-wug-bounces at mit.e|
>>
>> |         |           du                   |
>>
>> |         |                                |
>>
>> |         |                                |
>>
>> |         |           20/06/2007 23:43     |
>>
>> |         |           Please respond to    |
>>
>> |         |           "SAP Workflow Users' |
>>
>> |         |           Group"               |
>>
>> |         |                                |
>>
>> |---------+-------------------------------->
>>
>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
>> ----------------------------------------------|
>>
>>   |
>> |
>>
>>   |       To:       <sap-wug at mit.edu>
>> |
>>
>>   |       cc:
>> |
>>
>>   |       Subject:  Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0
>> |
>>
>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
>> ----------------------------------------------|
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>>
>>
>> I created a custom workflow last year while we were in SAP v4.7.  We
> are
>>
>> currently in the process of upgrading to ECC 6.0 (Basis pkg level
>>
>> SAPKB70011).  This workflow no longer works in 6.0.  It fails with an
>> error
>>
>> message OL383 "The source and target structure have a different number
>> of
>>
>> fields".   I get this problem whether the workflow was created in 4.7
>> and
>>
>> not worked until 6.0 or if it was created and worked in 6.0.
>>
>>
>>
>> I researched this error message and found a number of OSS Notes that
>> imply
>>
>> that there are lots of workflow problems in ECC 6.0 but none of them
>> refer
>>
>> to the BOR I am using (BKPF).  I did have several notes applied in 6.0
>> to
>>
>> prevent potential problems (OSS Note 887076 - Incorrect Binding After
>>
>> Upgrade and executed pgm ZRSWD_BINDING_RESTORE and OSS Note 1043988 -
>> Short
>>
>> Dump When Workflow Restarted) however, they made no impact on the
> error.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think the problem is a binding problem because the method that is
>> failing
>>
>> is the IMPORT_FROM_BOR_CONTAINER however, when I test this method, it
>> seems
>>
>> to work ok.  There are no syntax errors anywhere in the workflow or in
>> the
>>
>> business object BKPF or ZBKPF.
>>
>>
>>
>> I also noticed that BOR BKPF has a new method in 6.0 called
>> BKPF.GetARLData
>>
>> but that's related to ArchiveLink Data so I don't think that's causing
>> the
>>
>> problem since I'm not executing that method.
>>
>>
>>
>> Does anyone have any suggestions or insight?  Thanks for the help.
>>
>>
>>
>> Joanne Johnson
>>
>> Jo-Ann Stores, Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> SAP-WUG mailing list
>>
>> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
>>
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> ************************************************************************
>>
> ************************************************************************
>> ******
>>
>>
>>
>> Only an individual or entity who is intended to be a recipient of this
>> e-mail may access or use the information contained in this e-mail or
> any
>> of its attachments.  Opinions contained in this e-mail or any of its
>> attachments do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Queensland
>> Treasury.
>>
>>
>>
>> The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are confidential and
> may
>> be legally privileged and the subject of copyright.  If you have
>> received this e-mail in error, please notify Queensland Treasury
>> immediately and erase all copies of the e-mail and the attachments.
>> Queensland Treasury uses virus scanning software.  However, it is not
>> liable for viruses present in this e-mail or in any attachment.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> ************************************************************************
>>
> ************************************************************************
>> ******
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Message: 3
>>
>> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:33:55 +0200
>>
>> From: "Morris, Eddie" <eddie.morris at sap.com>
>>
>> Subject: RE: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0
>>
>> To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
>>
>> Message-ID:
>>
>>
>> <E8A49408428BC34DA7C4FADD5237FAA20709379E at dewdfe22.wdf.sap.corp>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="US-ASCII"
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Joanne,
>>
>>
>>
>> In relation to the error message OL383 can you check the method
>>
>> associated with the step that shows this error.
>>
>>
>>
>> The problem may be that an export parameter is incorrectly filled or
> not
>>
>> filled at all in your method code. You must make sure that the
> variable
>>
>> is filled before it is exported to the container and do not call
>>
>> SWC_SET_ELEMENT unless your variable is filled. E.g
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Data: OBJTYPE             LIKE SWOTOBJID-OBJTYPE.
>>
>> ...
>>
>>       SWC_GET_OBJECT_TYPE BKPF_obj OBJTYPE.
>>
>>       IF NOT OBJTYPE IS INITIAL.
>>
>>         SWC_SET_ELEMENT CONTAINER 'BKPF_obj' BKPF_obj.
>>
>>       ENDIF.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Maybe this can help.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Eddie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On
> Behalf
>>
>> Of Joanne Johnson
>>
>> Sent: 20 June 20, 2007 14:44
>>
>> To: sap-wug at mit.edu
>>
>> Subject: Workflow Fails After Upgrade to ECC 6.0
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>>
>>
>> I created a custom workflow last year while we were in SAP v4.7.  We
> are
>>
>> currently in the process of upgrading to ECC 6.0 (Basis pkg level
>>
>> SAPKB70011).  This workflow no longer works in 6.0.  It fails with an
>>
>> error message OL383 "The source and target structure have a different
>>
>> number of fields".   I get this problem whether the workflow was
> created
>>
>> in 4.7 and not worked until 6.0 or if it was created and worked in
> 6.0.
>>
>>
>>
>> I researched this error message and found a number of OSS Notes that
>>
>> imply that there are lots of workflow problems in ECC 6.0 but none of
>>
>> them refer to the BOR I am using (BKPF).  I did have several notes
>>
>> applied in 6.0 to prevent potential problems (OSS Note 887076 -
>>
>> Incorrect Binding After Upgrade and executed pgm ZRSWD_BINDING_RESTORE
>>
>> and OSS Note 1043988 - Short Dump When Workflow Restarted) however,
> they
>>
>> made no impact on the error.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think the problem is a binding problem because the method that is
>>
>> failing is the IMPORT_FROM_BOR_CONTAINER however, when I test this
>>
>> method, it seems to work ok.  There are no syntax errors anywhere in
> the
>>
>> workflow or in the business object BKPF or ZBKPF.
>>
>>
>>
>> I also noticed that BOR BKPF has a new method in 6.0 called
>>
>> BKPF.GetARLData but that's related to ArchiveLink Data so I don't
> think
>>
>> that's causing the problem since I'm not executing that method.
>>
>>
>>
>> Does anyone have any suggestions or insight?  Thanks for the help.
>>
>>
>>
>> Joanne Johnson
>>
>> Jo-Ann Stores, Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> SAP-WUG mailing list
>>
>> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
>>
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Message: 4
>>
>> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 04:33:50 +0530
>>
>> From: Albina Fernando <Albina.Fernando at lntinfotech.com>
>>
>> Subject: Clearing the Workflow buffer
>>
>> To: sap-wug at mit.edu
>>
>> Message-ID:
>>
>>
>>
> <OF17CD1152.6D49BB0F-ON65257300.007EB19A-65257300.007EB19E at lntinfotech.c
>> om>
>>
>>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>>
>>
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>
>> URL:
>>
> http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20070621/bde9855c/a
>> ttachment-0001.htm
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Message: 5
>>
>> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 16:14:32 -0700
>>
>> From: "Miller, Jerry" <Jerry.Miller at NOVELLUS.com>
>>
>> Subject: RE: Clearing the Workflow buffer
>>
>> To: "'SAP Workflow Users' Group'" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
>>
>> Message-ID:
>>
>>
>> <63B36FB1288C1A4D8AE8B807730D47CF824564 at EVS1.corp.novellus.com>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>>
>>
>> Call me and I will walk you thru one possible solution. (408.577.4513)
>>
>>
>>
>>   _____
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Albina Fernando [mailto:Albina.Fernando at lntinfotech.com]
>>
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 4:04 PM
>>
>> To: sap-wug at mit.edu
>>
>> Subject: Clearing the Workflow buffer
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>>
>>
>>   I have one problem.. Yesterday we had transported a new task to
>>
>> Production. Now the new task is not reflecting in production. We
> checkd
>> the
>>
>> Workflow runtime version. in the development system as well as the
>>
>> produciton system, the active, running version is the same. We had
> faced
>> a
>>
>> similar problem earlier also. but he same problem got resolved on its
>> own. I
>>
>> had read in the Workflow book that every midnight the workflow buffers
>> are
>>
>> refreshed. And then automatically the tasks come to the new version.
> Now
>> we
>>
>> have waited for almost a day.. but nothing seems to be changing . Can
> we
>>
>> manually clear the buffer. I suppose there is one transaction SWU_OBUF
>> to
>>
>> clear the workflow buffer. Can anyone advise me if this is the correct
>> way
>>
>> of doing or is there any job that clears/refreshes the runtime buffer.
>> How
>>
>> should we proceed in such cases.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Albina
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> This email may contain confidential or privileged information for the
>>
>> intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please
> do
>> not
>>
>> use or disseminate the information, notify the sender and delete it
> from
>>
>> your system. Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>>
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>
>> URL:
>>
> http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20070620/1075e6f6/a
>> ttachment.htm
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> SAP-WUG mailing list
>>
>> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
>>
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> End of SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 31, Issue 57
>>
>> ***************************************
>>
>>
>> T-Mobile (UK) Limited
>> Company Registered Number: 02382161
>> Registered Office Address: Hatfield Business Park, Hatfield,
>> Hertfordshire, AL10 9BW
>> Registered in England and Wales
>>
>> NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
>>
>> This email (including attachments) is confidential. If you are not the
>> intended recipient, notify the sender immediately, delete this email
> from
>> your system and do not disclose or use for any purpose.
>> _______________________________________________
>> SAP-WUG mailing list
>> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>>
>
>
> --
> Mike Pokraka
> Senior Consultant
> Workflow Connections
> Mobile: +44(0)7786 910855
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Mike Pokraka
Senior Consultant
Workflow Connections
Mobile: +44(0)7786 910855