Parallel Subflow inside a Parallel Subflow??

[Mark Pyc]

G'day again,

After sending the initial mail it occurred to me I could test my theory by
directly starting the first level Subflow directly, and as guessed the
subsequent parallel subflow step initiates successfully. So I'm guessing
there is a limitation (potentially a bug in release Basis 731 sp 16) that
means you can't have a parallel subflow within a parallel subflow. I get
that there could be concerns for endless loops spawning recursive subflows
but seems a bit rude to not support it at all.

In the screen shot below you can see when I started an instance of the
subflow WS90100016 that it successfully spawned an instance of WS90100019
in step 1396. No changes to bindings or data, just this time WS90100016
wasn't a subflow.



Anyone know if it should ever work or am I just pushing the boundaries of
the sane?

Have fun,
Mark


On 4 April 2018 at 19:06, Mark Pyc <mark.pyc at gmail.com> wrote:

> G'day Wuggers,
>
> Wow, been a long time, but scratching my head again so once again come to
> the fount of all WF knowledge.
>
> I'm helping another developer who has got to a point of confusion in a
> parked Logistics Inv. scenario where an Invoice is Held with reference to
> multiple POs and multiple items within those POs. It is Saved as Held as
> there are no Service Entry Sheets. The solution is to send create parallel
> WFs out per PO to the PO creator/requestor asking them to create Service
> Entry Sheets (SES) if appropriate. The desire is to have a Wait for
> Correlated Event that an SES has been created for each item. You can't seem
> to create parallel Wait for Correlated Event steps, so have put the Waits
> inside a Subflow.
>
> The binding to the Sub-Subflow  is based on &PO_ITEMS[&_WF_PARFOREACH_INDEX&]&
> with the Items table indicated on the Misc tab.
>
> The system doesn't throw an error, but it doesn't create the subflow
> either. In the log there is a phantom step with a step type of "STEP" which
> I can't ever remember seeing before. Note that although there is a Node
> number there is no Task Number and no Workitem Number
>
> Is this some weird restriction that you can't have a parallel subflow
> within a parallel subflow???
>
> The WF just carries on like that Step doesn't exist, which indeed it
> doesn't seem to.
>
> I'm not justifying the design either from a business process or technical
> build, but I'm at a loss as to what is happening technically when trying to
> implement this.
>
> Appreciate any sagely input!
>
> Have fun,
> Mark
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20180404/0960c3eb/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 56345 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20180404/0960c3eb/attachment-0002.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 81273 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20180404/0960c3eb/attachment-0003.png