Only one user at the time can execute VE01 (due to blockage of VEIAV)

Hi,
As I understand it only one user at the time can execute VE01 (or MEIS for arrivals). If someone is already executing the VE01 transaction the error-message "Table VEIAV is blocked by user XX" appears. It does not matter if one tries to execute it for different legal entities - no parallel processing seems to be possible.
This is a huge limitation for a global concern with many entities operating in the same SAP instance. Does anyone recognize this problem and are there any ways to get around it? It does not make sense that dispatches (VE01) and arrivals (MEIS) cannot be executed for several organizational units at the same time in parallel?
Thanks in advance,
Mats Hansson

yes I know this problem.
One should not maintain much thru this transaction.
for me it is not more than an emergency transaction, as it is not really more than table maintenance thru SM30
You should investigate what entries/changes the users have to make.
Limit these manual entries by having better data in the system, so that SAP can itself create the entries for this table.
Organize more, less users , maybe just one per company who shall maintain VEFU manually.
Train them to prepare their entries before they start using VEFU.
Explain that they should leave VEFU as soon as possible as the block other users.
assign maintenance windows to the users.

Similar Messages

Only one user at a time can log in per client

Server: 10.6.2
Client: 10.5.8
The share point on the server is the default of /Users. Home directories are configured as /Network/Severs/hostname/Users/username. In the "Home" tab of each user, the home directory shows up as "afp://hostname/Users", which is the default when creating a user.
On a given client, only one user can log in at a time. If the first user switches to the login screen without logging out (fast user switching), when the second user attempts to log in, they get an error "You are unable to log in to account "xxxx" at this time."
Looking in the secure.log, the error appears to be "file busy":
Mar 7 12:13:39 G4-MDD authorizationhost[677]: ERROR | -[HomeDirMounter mountNetworkHomeWithURL:attributes:dirPath:username:] | PremountHomeDirectoryWithAuthentication( url=afp://Mini.local/Users, homedir=/Network/Servers/Mini.local/Users/xxxxxx, name=xxxxxx ) returned 16
The server's /Users directory is mounted. It appears to be trying to automount another copy, rather than use the existing mount.
How do I resolve this so multiple users can be logged in at one time? Surely I don't have to create a share point for each user?

I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one encountering this problem, although the fact that this problem has apparently existed for some time is mind boggling to me. The idea that there is some data corruption issue here is not a valid concern. We did this all the time on Linux in my previous life. There is no need to unmount the mounted directory, at least in the default case. The mount point is /Users. Home directories on the server are /Users/fred and /Users/sally. Automounter mounts /Users at the mount point /Network/Servers/serverhostname/Users. Fred is logged in and can access /Users/fred. Now Sally wants to log in. /Users is already mounted. There is no reason to unmount/remount /Users. OS X can see it is already mounted. Just log Sally in - she already has full access to her files.
If Fred and Sally reside on different servers, then there would be different mount points /Network/Servers/hostname/Users - again no conflict in the mount points.
The only solution I can see right now is a separate share point for each user, which is unacceptable. That might work for my two users. It's hardly scalable from a maintenance standpoint.
I do have the problem of fred logging out and sally not being able to get in right away, but that period is probably less than a minute. Wait a minute, then sally can log in.

1. Does not start automatically 2. Only ONE user at a time

When I plug the IPOD it should start iTunes automatically (I have the box checked) but it does not. Never has done that. I have the latest 7.1 version.
Another pain in the rear is that only one user at a time can run iTunes. That stinks. If another user has it open you MUST log off, stop them, log on. They ought to make this work for all users as other windows pro rams do. If it is doing NOTHING with the library then I ought to be able to use it.

That may be true but it is a real pain since when it happens the only way to recover is to terminate all of the iTunes modules with task manager and start it manually. It also leaves the IPOD in a state that says do not disconnect. You can disconnect since nothing is really happening but there is no excuse for this not to start much faster. When you have multiple users it is a real pain. It ought to be able to either end when finished or better yet allow multiple users simultaneously updating from different libraries.
I guess i will just have to get in the habit of treating it as a single user and start and stop it every time I need it and be suer not to let it run. Not nice because that means waiting for larger Podcast downloads instead of having there ready for me when I sign on my computer.

Concurrent program to be submitted y only one user at a time

Hi
I have an issue with one of my reports. The report is using temporary tables, those will under go insertion and deletion while the report is running. So, to make sure that two or more concurrent requests submitted for same report, will not conflict, I want to make my concurrent request to be submitted by only one user at a time.
How can I do that?
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks
BalaKrishna

The "run alone" box should not be checked. This indicates that this program can only run when no others are running. Pl see MOS Doc 1078462.6 (Custom SQL Concurrent Program Returns NO MANAGER Error). This option should typically not be used.
To be able to achieve what you need, set the incompatibility (as you have done) and then bounce the concurrent managers for the setting to take effect. Pl see these MOS Docs
436186.1 - Cannot Make Concurrent Programs Incompatible With Itself
142944.1 - How to Make a Concurrent Program Incompatible with Itself
HTH
Srini

How to : only one user in a branch can do the batch process at a time ?

dear gurus,
In ADF web application, accessed by multiple branch (20), there is a
batch process to create invoices from orders. There are 3-5 users in a
branch. one user can process about 30 - 50 orders to become
invoices.
Business rule is : In one batch process, each users must produce
invoices with gapless invoice number. e.g : user_1 create 30 invoices
no.001 - 030, user_2 create 40 invoices no.031-070 ... and so on...
So we want to protect that at a time, in one branch, only one user can
do the batch process. User_2 must wait until user_1 is done to start
the process.
We use the table below to maintain the latest invoice number created :
CREATE TABLE doc_number
DOC_TYPE VARCHAR2(6 BYTE) NOT NULL,
BRANCH_CODE VARCHAR2(6 BYTE) NOT NULL,
DOC_NBR NUMBER(12) DEFAULT 0,
CONSTRAINT "DOC_NUMBER_PK" PRIMARY KEY (DOC_TYPE, BRANCH_CODE)
The question is :
I think of locking a spicific row of the doc_number table (select ...
for update wait 10) at the beginning of the batch process stored
procedure.
But what if the session/connection left orphan and the row is lockde
forever before the dba kill it ?
So is there a better approach to limit the user execution of the
process ?
Thank you very much for your help,
Krist

Forget it. See http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:4343369880986.
However, if you are dead set on doing this old fashioned thing of trying to emulate paper invoices from a numbered tablet, you could always just let everyone generate all of their invoices with no invoice number whenever they want, then at some time ( say 21:00 every day), take a lock on the table and apply invoice numbers to all of the records with a null invoice number -- which will take only a few centiseconds at most. And let the users/system print only invoices that have numbers assigned. This way, you pretty much eliminate the concurrency issue of various branches generating invoices only in their time window -- yuk, what an awful way to have to do business.
And completely forget about users or branches having their own range of numbers. That is completely nuts. Your database already knows which branch owns which invoice, right??

Is there a way have a file only accessable by only one user at a time

Here's the question...
I want to set up a file so that it can only be accessed by only one person at a time - is there any way to do this?

Turn off fast user switching and autologin, making all users log off before other users can use the machine.

Only one user at a time

I'm looking for help.
I have two user accounts on my iMac. Both have their own iTunes library file but these both reference to a shared store of music files (to avoid duplicates). I would now like to move this shared music to an external HDD attached to my TC.
My problem is this. If user 1 first accesses the external HDD then when user 2 tries to do so there is a little red icon on the folder and permission is denied. If I disconnect all users from the TC and then retry with user 2 the problem is reversed. It seems to me that only one user account is allowed to access a TC external HDD at a time. Is there any way around this?
In case anybody asks, my reason for moving the files is that I am hoping to buy a Sonos music system, which can read iTunes music from the TC as though it were an NAS, even if the computer is off.

I think you're being misled a bit by the interface: the checkbox labelled "Strict locking" doesn't just allow strict locking, it requires it (and thus disallows byte-range locking). That is, with strict locking enabled, any client that tries to lock any part of the file actually locks the entire file. Access normally depends on byte-range locking to allow different clients to share the database (as long as they aren't trying to modify the same part of it at the same time), but with strict locking the first client locks all others out.

Only one user at a time allowed to open MS Access database on a Mac share

I have an issue trying to open a Microsoft Access database from our Mac OS X Server running on XServe.
The MS Access file is stored on a Share Point on the XServe. Windows XP clients open the database. The problem is that it will only allow one user at a time to open the file. The has previously been operating fine when it was stored on a Windows server.
The Group's permissions for this Share Point allow Read & Write.
Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

I think you're being misled a bit by the interface: the checkbox labelled "Strict locking" doesn't just allow strict locking, it requires it (and thus disallows byte-range locking). That is, with strict locking enabled, any client that tries to lock any part of the file actually locks the entire file. Access normally depends on byte-range locking to allow different clients to share the database (as long as they aren't trying to modify the same part of it at the same time), but with strict locking the first client locks all others out.

No Internet acces or only one computer at the time

Hi everybody,
I'm a freelance IT supported and I'm new to Apple. I studied and always worked with PC but with people having more and more Mac at home I had to adapte.
I have a problem at a customer's place which is kinda hard to explain. I'm unable to get Internet access on any devices connected to the WIFI. I tryed sevral setup and the best I can get is "one-device-at-the-time" (the last device that connects to the WIFI). I did screen captures of this setup.
The setup isD-Link DSL-320B Modem (set as DHCP) --> AirPort Extreme (WAN Port) --> wireless devices (iMac, iPad, iPhone, PC, etc.)
Unfortunatly, all the screen captures are in French (I'm in Switzerland) but since it's not literature, I think you can all get what's writen bellow.
mode pont = bridge mode (I think this is how I actualy got one computer to access the web)
I don't understand why the address is 169.254.xx.xx. Shouldn't it get a 192.168.1.x since the D-Link is setup as DHCP (see next screen capt) ? The DNS servers are the ones provided on the ISP info sheet but I don't think it's necessary to put them here, right ?
strangely, the IP range didn't show up when I did the screen capture but it's 192.168.1.2 to 192.168.1.254
I spent two unsuccessful hours last time, i'd realy like to make it right next time so I can actualy send them an invoice and eat more than pastas ;-)
thanks for your help,
Julien

Hiya.. thanks for the lovely screen shots.. this is hard and would be impossible without them.
Something odd is happening... I don't see anything wrong with your setup.
What I do see is dlink doing its dinky toy dlink type stuff.
The AE should have got an IP from the dlink. 192.168.1.x and as you have it bridged it should also pass packets to the dlink which would get IP for the wireless.. nothing wrong in any of that.
It is failing .. and obviously not passing packets correctly on the ethernet link to the Dlink.
DHCP discovery at the very least is failing..
Look at your last screenshot of the dlink setup. Look at the IP handed to the AE. 83.79.62.39
Where did that come from.. it says the AE is a client but the IP is some odd thing.
Now did you happen to set the AE in DMZ of the dlink or did you use some other method to try and force this to work.. at some point it is passing .. perhaps an old public IP to the AE.. which is not correct.
Your tech-it-easy computer plugged into the dlink is getting the correct LAN ip 192.168.1.2 clearly the AE has failed.
I recommend you reset the Dlink to factory and redo the setup.
If the ISP uses PPPoE, then setup the dlink in bridge mode and run the PPPoE client on the AE.. this is the best method.. but PPPoE is seldom used in Europe for whatever reason.
If you use pppoa or ipoa or other dsl authentication then you must keep using the AE in bridge.
Go back to the fundamental problem.. it is not passing packets over ethernet correctly. The AE is gigabit unless it is very old. Dlink I am guessing is 100mbit. There are occasional hitches.. if you have a switch 10/100 drag it along with you and plug it between the dlink and the AE.. and see if it then gets IP correctly. Check with another ethernet cord.. all the stuff you know.
In the AE you can set wan port speed.. but you will need the AE in router mode.. ie it is NATting a public IP, but you will get double NAT.. as a test you can go for that.
Use 100mbps full duplex.
Of course you don't want to double NAT permanently.
If you don't make progress.. post again..
There is a manual way of bridging the AE.. we normally call it wan bypass.
It is complicated so try the above before you do that.
BTW,,, when the one computer does work, check what IP it is getting.. is it 83.79.62.39.. or whatever the public IP. If so the AE is definitely set wrongly in the DMZ of the dlink.

Only one device at a time can access wireless

Whenever I access the wireless network at home with a laptop or iPod, it kicks my wife off of the iMac's access. Basically, only one device can use the wireless network at a time.
I'm not that comfortable with network issues, but I'm not a total noob either. It doesn't seem like this should be a problem.
Can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks.

Depending on your type of router & setup, read the troubleshooting manual, contact their tech support department, check your network settings through System Preferences, run the network diagnostic test if applicable.
System Preferences>Network
Click the Assist Me button.
In the next window that pops up, click the Diagnostic button & do the necessary.
If using one of Apple's routers cross-post in one of the Airport Forums.
Also, search out your type of issue in Knowledge Base.

Issue with QuickVPN on SA520 - only one user at a time?

Currently, whenever we have multiple users attempt to VPN in - the first user gets in fine, however, any subsequent user is able to connect but repeatedly receives the message that they are unable to communicate with the network, would you like to wait. I'd like to be able to have more than one user connected concurrently to the VPN - any help would be greatly appreciated.

Hi:
Thanks for reporting the issue. Please let us know which OS you are using that is experiencing this problem.
If you are using Window 7 and/or Vista, we already have a fix in our next release image 1.1.62 (MR2).
It would be release soon, either end of this week or early next week.
If you need it earlier, please let me know, I can PM you with a private image.
Thanks,
Charles

Ipod synched to only one library at a time - can not add songs?

I initially loaded my shuffle with songs on a friends computer. Now I want to add more songs to it but if I plug it into a different computer in itunes I get an error message that says my ipod is synced with another library, it can only be synced with one so my only option is to delete my ipod and sync with the new library? (my friends computer crashed months ago so there is no option of getting those songs or going back to that computer to change my settings) I do not want to delete my ipod and start over. Is this specific to the shuffle because I know people who have plugged ipods into other friend's computers to add songs? Has anyone else had this problem and do you know how to fix it? Thanks!

dschultz wrote:
Is this specific to the shuffle because I know people who have plugged ipods into other friend's computers to add songs? Has anyone else had this problem and do you know how to fix it? Thanks!
It's specific to the shuffle and is supposed to prevent (easy) theft of music.
Advising you how to circumvent this is actually against the terms of use of this forum...HOWEVER (from the very fine "iPod shuffle Features Guide:")
Important:
Once you’ve synced iPod shuffle with the iTunes library on a computer, a
message appears whenever you connect iPod shuffle to another computer, asking if
you want to sync with the iTunes library on the new computer. Click Cancel if you want
to keep the current music content on iPod shuffle. Or, click Transfer Purchases to keep
the contents on iPod shuffle and copy the purchased songs on it to the iTunes library
on the new computer. See iTunes Help for more information.

Only one user has the site coming up as insecure how do we fix this?

Our company webpage is coming up with the shield and displays with no graphics. We can allow it to display manually by clicking on the shield, but then when Firefox is restarted it is back to not displaying again. . We have checked all of the settings and cannot find anything to "white list" the site. I would think that if it was going to do this for one person it would do it for everyone? The computer is a Dell laptop running Windows 7 Enterprise with Firefox 33.0.3. He does not have this issue with IE 10.

Separate Issue; Update your
Flash Player '''v15.0.0.189 http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/'''
Shockwave Director '''v12.1.3.153 http://get.adobe.com/shockwave/'''
Go to the web page. Once the page is loading, mouse to the address bar
and '''Left''' click the icon. A window for displaying site information should
come up. Select '''More Information.''' Now select '''Permissions.''' In the
menu, find and check the plugins, make sure they are set properly.

WRT45G: can only connect one pc at the time to internet, cannot login to router setup

Hello,
I don't get this. The complete network worked fine for ... years? After a call with the ISP about a general/different issue, we can now only connect one pc at the time to internet. (We were asked to take out cables and we've put them back).
I've been trying and searching for an answer for hours.
problem:
We can only connect through the router to internet with only one pc at the time (the first pc we connect after starting up the router).
Also we cannot get into the setup menu of the router at 192.168.1.1
We've been trying to reset the modem for 10, 30 seconds.
Auto resolve IP/DNS. DHCP is enabled.
I also remembered that I pushed the SES button, it turned from orange to flashing bluish. I never knew aboutthis function, nor it is mentioned in the manual I downloaded. Now this SES indicator is off.
Also WLAN and DMZ led are off.
I downloaded EasyLink_Connect.exe, went through the setup. It recognises there's internet connection, but stops and says: cisco does not support this modem.
Temp. replacing this WRT45G modem with another one did not resolve the issue.
I have no clue what went wrong, what we did wrong, and how we can resolve this issue? Please help! Thanks
Message Edited by Brammm on 11-27-2008 03:13 PM

Okay!
1. (results when having assigned a static IP) :
Windows IP-configuratie
         Primair DNS-achtervoegsel. . . . .:
        Knooppunttype: . . . . . . . . . .: onbekend     (unknown)
        IP-routering ingeschakeld. . . . .: nee      (no)
        WINS-proxy ingeschakeld . . . . . : nee    (no)
Ethernet-adapter LAN-verbinding:
         Verbindingsspec. DNS-achtervoegsel:
        Beschrijving . . . . . . . . . . .:
          VIA Compatable Fast Ethernet Adapter
        Fysiek adres. . . . . . . . . . . : 00-16-17-CE-D5-40
        DHCP ingeschakeld:. . . . . . . . : nee    (no)
        IP-adres. . . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.20
        Subnetmasker. . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
        Standaardgateway. . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
        DNS-servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
(results without having assigned a static IP: automatic config.) :
Ethernet-adapter LAN-verbinding:
        Verbindingsspec. DNS-achtervoegsel:
        Beschrijving . . . . . . . . . . .:
          VIA Compatable Fast Ethernet Adapter
        Fysiek adres. . . . . . . . . . . : 00-16-17-CE-D5-40
        DHCP ingeshakeld. . . . . . . . . : ja     (yes)
        Autom. configuratie ingeschakeld. : ja       (yes)
        IP-adres. . . . . . . . . . . . . : 84.30.99.32
Subnetmasker. . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.254.0
Standaardgateway. . . . . . . . . : 84.30.98.1
DHCP-server . . . . . . . . . . . : 213.51.144.90
        DNS-servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 212.54.40.25
                                            212.54.35.25
2. I do have another router, when I try that one, the problem we have remains. So that's a bit strange to me. That one is supposed to be working.
Does this SES function configure anything other than the modem? So, does it alter PC configurations? I have no clue. We even start to wonder whether the ISP is able to set up their internet in a way that unables us to make use of a router? That would be ridiculous
Message Edited by Brammm on 11-30-2008 04:03 AM

Locking a JSP Page i.e allowing only one user to access it at a time

Hi,
I have web application where multiple users can log in at the same time.
I have a JSP where a user is presented with a list of executable items.It is quite possible that at the same time more that one user tries to execute the same item.I want to disable this. i.e at a time only one user should be able to execute the item.
Currently what i can think of is putting an extra column in the database...saying that this item is locked and you cannot access it until unlocked.But then this would involve a round trip to database.I want to avoid it, and do some coding in java code itself.
But i dont know how to proceed.
Any Help......

sorry for the misdirection :(
yes..try using the synchronizing for the run process for of the item in the action class.
I shall try to provide you with the code changes, if can you please provide the back end code doing the job u said

Only one user at the time can execute VE01 (due to blockage of VEIAV)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for