Parallel Subflow inside a Parallel Subflow??

Fri Apr 6 10:31:13 EDT 2018

Feels so good to know that there is still helping hands on here!

On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Griffiths, Mark <mark.griffiths at sap.com>
wrote:

> Great to see you folk are all still out there!  Hope you are all well!
>
>
>
> Mark G.
>
>
>
> *From:* sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] *On
> Behalf Of *Keohan, Susan - 1140 - MITLL
> *Sent:* 05 April 2018 15:50
> *To:* SAP Workflow Users' Group <sap-wug at mit.edu>
> *Subject:* RE: Parallel Subflow inside a Parallel Subflow??
>
>
>
> WOW you people are making me SO HAPPY.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu <sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu> *On Behalf Of *Mark
> Pyc
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 5, 2018 3:48 AM
> *To:* WUG <sap-wug at mit.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: Parallel Subflow inside a Parallel Subflow??
>
>
>
> Wow, what a mixed bag this has been for me! So great to feel the WUG love
> again!! So, so frustrating that I've wasted my and your time.
>
>
>
> Dynamic Parallel Subflows inside Dynamic Parallel Subflows work a treat!
> All good!! No technical issue.
>
>
>
> What was confusing me was that the developer I picked this up from had an
> import table of items declared on the first dynamic subflow. However it
> wasn't bound. But when I looked at logs, and indeed when I did a
> SWUS_WITH_REFERENCE the table was filled. The reason it was filled is that
> he had a method to fill it in a different fork branch to the one that
> contained the call to the SubSubFlow. As such, the first time round the
> table was empty, no dynamic subflows generated - system working as
> designed.
>
>
>
> Thanks so much for the suggestion to create a simple example to show to
> OSS. Building this proved that the technical concept worked.
>
>
>
> Love you Wuggers!!!
>
>
>
> Have fun,
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On 4 April 2018 at 22:39, Mark Pyc <mark.pyc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>
>

-- 
Regards/Groete

Darlington Chiyamha
SAP ABAP/Workflow Consultant
Cell: +27 71 869 3176
Alt Cell: +27 82 061 6309
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20180406/f8743e54/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 81395 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20180406/f8743e54/attachment-0002.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 105312 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20180406/f8743e54/attachment-0003.png