I wanted to send emails a day(fewdays) before a particular due date.
I went on to try with automation actions and was confused with on how it would work
and also the server action for that respective automated action
I would like to know whether "based on timed condition" works or does not work, as far as I have tried and researched, this seems to be a bug or which does not work.
Automated Actions do work, and are quite useful.
One catch with timed conditions is that they are triggered once and only once for each document/record, when the time condition is reached for the first time.
If you are playing around with timed conditions and use the same document/record for your tests, it will seem that later tries don't work, since triggered once it won't be triggered again.
In this scenario, you need to test changes to the Automated Action using a different test record.
Other things that might be wrong:
Your outgoing email might not be working properly.
The filter in your Automated Action might not be correct. Make sure you test it on a list view, and that the "User" field is blank.
Related
I got a partial answer here but not exactly what I wanted.
The link describes how to get a list of task futures but what I'd really like to be able to do is list out and cancel individual jobs (that might be hung, long running etc etc). I've seen another post implying that this is not possible but I'd like to confirm (see second link)
Thanks
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/How-can-I-obtain-a-list-of-executing-jobs-on-an-ignite-node-td8841.html
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Cancel-tasks-on-Ignite-compute-grid-worker-nodes-td5027.html
Yes, this is not possible and actually I'm not sure how this can be done in general case. Imagine there are 5 jobs running and you want to cancel one of them. How are you going to identify it? It seems to be very use case specific to me.
However, you can always implement your own mechanism to do this. One of the possible ways is to use ComputeTaskSession API and task attributes. E.g., set a special attribute that will act as signal for job cancellation and create attribute listener that will stop job execution accordingly.
I've watched quite a few videos on YouTube and have a basic understanding of how to find user-exits (enhancements?) and implement them. However when I try to replicate what I've seen it doesn't appear to be working.
I'm looking to create a user-exit that would execute when a production order has been confirmed (closed/finished) via CO11N. Someone suggested that I put in a line of code "BREAK username." So that I could verify that my code was firing. Nothing breaks. I've tried putting in a message from code found on the internet
MESSAGE s208(00) WITH 'TEST'.
No message is shown. I've activated the include and the project. I've tried different exits/includes and no matter what I do, nothing seems to break or show a message.
Is there something simple I'm missing? I've tried CONFPI05 and CONFPM05.
CONFPI05 is for process orders. CONFPM05 is for plant maintenance orders. First you need to check which kind of order you use. I assume you use production orders. You should check User-Exit CONFPP05 than.
Anyway, I would recommend using BAdI WORKORDER_CONFIRM. Within this BAdI there are methods available where you can raise an error message.
From the BAdI documentation:
Note that in the methods, no system messages may be sent. The only
exceptions are the AT_SAVE and AT_CANCEL_CHECK methods. Within these
methods, a system message may be issued, but only if you trigger the
exception ERROR_WITH_MESSAGE (for AT_SAVE method) or NOT_ALLOWED (for
AT_CANCEL_CHECK method) at the same time.
Note also that within the methods, the "commit work" instruction may
not be carried out because this would lead to incorrect data in the
database.
I strongly recommend not to use MESSAGE statement in any User-Exit or BAdI implementation. The MESSAGE statement will implicit call a COMMIT WORK which could cause database inconsistencies (happens very often by the way).
One additional note. You should check using Checkpoint Groups instead of using BREAK-POINT or BREAK username directly.
I checked the documentation:
CONFPI05 to update your own data after saving the confirmation
In another documentation I found another warning:
In this customer enhancement it is strictly forbidden to send error messages or other messages because otherwise there is the danger that data will be inconsistent. SAP cannot be held responsible for this!!
This sounds like changes in update task. By default breakpoints in update task are not enabled.
Should your code be processed after you pushed save?
If yes, what you can try:
Set anywhere a breakpoint. Or try /h during data insertion.
In debug screen activate the update debugging:
Continue the process with F8.
Hopefully you stop at your break-point.
Worklight 6.1 on both Windows (colleague) and Mac (me), building an a Hybrid app destined for Android device but to speed up development we do initial testing as Mobile Web App in Chrome browser on desktop.
We get a weird symptom that I'm trying to fine-down to a reproducible test case. I think I see different behaviours when stepping in debugger and just letting it run. Want to check whether a certain coding pattern could be the cause of the symptom before I go any further.
Fundamental question: should we wait for the resolution of a promise returned by a JSONSTore request for an action on a collection before issuing another request? more explanation below.
The overall intent is to load some data into the JSONStore, with some intelligent replace/merge action if a record is already present. Pseudo code:
for each record retrieved from back-end
if ( record already present in Store )
do some data merging
replace record
else
add record
The application code actually works like this, just considering the add() case, the problem manifests when the store is empty, all records need to be added
for each record to add
addPromise = store.get().add(record);
listOfPromises.insert(addPromise);
examine the list of promises recording any errors
That is there is no "wait" for add to finish before issuing the next add request. Hence in effect we've initiated a set of adds "in parallel" whatever that might mean in JavaScript in Chrome.
The code appears to run just fine, no errors reported. On android device it works reliably. In Chrome under normal running (no stepping in debugger) we end up with no reported errors but only one record inserted - indeed as though a snapshot of the initial "empty" store had been taken and each add is working on that "empty" copy.
After writing this I'm now pretty convinced that the coding pattern described above is vulnerable to a kind of race and that the better approach is build a list of documents to be added and insert them in a single operation.
A more detailed answer will be coming later, but I now know that this
the coding pattern described above is vulnerable to a kind of race and
that the better approach is build a list of documents to be added and
insert them in a single operation.
is true. In the browser the JSONStore does require that we wait for the result of one request before issuing another one. The recommended approach is
var dataToAdd = buildArrayOfDataToAdd(responseFromServer);
var dataToReplace = buildArrayOfDataToReplace(responseFromServer);
jsonstore.add( dataToAdd ).then( function() { jsonstore.replace( dataToReplace); })
I have Jenkins project that perform some sort of sanity check on couple of independent documents. Check result is written in JUnit XML format.
When one document test fails, entire build fails. Jenkins can be simply configured to send email to commiter in this situation. But I want to notify commiters only when new test failed or any failed test was fixed with the commit. They are not interested in failed tests for documents they have not edited. Email should contain only information of changes in tests, not full test report. Is it possible to send this kind of notification with any currently available Jenkins plugins? What could be the simplest way to achieve this?
I had the same question today. I wanted to configure Jenkins sending notifications only when new tests fail.
What I did was to install email-ext plugin.
You can find there a special trigger that is called Regression (An email will be sent any time there is a regression. A build is considered to regress whenever it hasmore failures than the previous build.)
Regarding fixed tests, there is Improvement trigger (An email will be sent any time there is an improvement. A build is considered to have improved wheneverit has fewer failures than the previous build.)
I guess that this is what you are looking for.
Hope it helps
There's the email-ext plugin. I don't think it does exactly what you want (e.g. sending only emails to committers who have changed a file that is responsible for a failure). You might be able to work around that/extend the plugin though.
Also have a look at the new Emailer, which talks about new email functionality in core hudson that is based on aforementioned plugin.
We're using WatiN to test our web portals. During the course of an E2E test, we'll occasionally see client-side script errors on the IE status bar. I'd like to chain a handler onto the script error event and record the error for later analysis and bug filing.
Problem is, I don't know that there's a global script error event or how to chain into it. And if there's not a browser-agnostic way to accomplish this, I can create MyIE and MyFF subclasses but then this becomes two browser-specific questions.
In essence, I'm thinking of something like this entirely made-up call:
browser.ScriptEngine.SetCustomErrorHandler(LogScriptingError);
... where LogScriptErrors is my code that does the obvious.
Many of our client-side scripting errors don't necessarily prevent the test from continuing (a pretty UI element didn't animate, for example, but the underlying form is still submittable), so I'd like to log the error and forge ahead in most cases.
You probably looking for this:
window.onerror=function(message, url, line){logError();};
You can add this code to your pages to handle errors in logError(). but this may not work in all browser(works in IE), check this for browser compatibility:
http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/events/error.html
Or you may try this commercial product:
exceptionhub.com/
You could maybe co-opt the ability to inject eval code (described under "Added Eval functionality") to add a script that caught all errors, not just errors from the eval'ed script. I'm not sure if this would work, but it's an area to explore. Another resource might be this blog post, which discusses how to evaluate Javascript in WatiN.