Advantage of Async over Sync Intereface

Hi Experts
Can you please provide me the Advantages of Async interfaces over Sync Interface.
Regards
Komal

Hi Komal,
PI supporting two way of communication Asyncronous and Synchrounous.Depending on your requirement we use the mode of communication.
if you want to the behaviour ,Synchronous scenario will give response back,asynchrounous not.
betetr to searh in sdn for more info.

Similar Messages

What is the advantages of polymorphism over method overriding?

what is the advantages of polymorphism over method overriding,that means if we are able to to create object at different instances at diff time for that sub class reff variable than what is the need of careating object of super class data type(i.e why always it is necessary to have upcasting for polymorphism?but if we can achive the same output without upcasting).....please tell me..lets have complete discuss..

Seriously though....
WebLogic (for which I have deployed many apps on) as
well as Websphere are both high end Java application
servers, meaning J2EE servers (in short). They allow
one to deploy Enterprise Archive(EAR), a Web
Archive(WAR), or an EJB Archive (in a JR file).
These two servers allow one to deploy EJBs, use
e JNDI, JMS, connectors, and other J2EE technologies
- Tomcat does not. well, EJBs - no
JNDI, yes - http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-4.1-doc/jndi-resources-howto.html
JMS - yes (with an implementation, such as ActiveMQ: http://activemq.codehaus.org/Tomcat)
Not sure what you mean by "connectors".
Tomcat provides quite a bit of functionality (but yes, no EJBs)

ASYNC to SYNC scenario using BPM.

hi,
i have a async to sync scenario. i have a File sender->PI(BPM)->ECC and the response from ECC->PI->SOAP.
Here in PI, i am using BPM. The ECC side is a Synchronous BAPI. The response is sent to the SOAP receiver.
in BPM, can someone tell me how many transformation steps do i need i.e mappings. and how many abstract interfaces, synchronous interfaces, outbound interfaces, inbound interfaces?
also how many send,receive and transformation steps.
and in the configuration part,
how many receiver determinations, interface determinations do we need.
rgds,
mithun

Hi,
File sender->PI(BPM)->ECC and the response from ECC->PI->SOAP
Service interfaces
-> SI_OB for file (Request)
->SI_IB for Soap(ASy Response)
->SI_ABstract(ASy Request)
->SI_Abstract (Asy Response)
->Si_REq_RES_ABS(Syn)
->SI_ABS(ASY BAPI REQ)
->SI_ABS(ASY BAPI RES)
mappings
one for request mapping(file Req to BAPREQ) and one for response mapping(BAPI REs to RESponse mSg).
operation mappings-2, one for Req MApping ANd One for Res ponse mapping.
IP
reciv->transformation(REq)->Send(SYN/ASYN)->transformation(RES)->Send
ID:
3 reciver deteminations
one for file to IP
IP to ECC and IP to SOAP
3 interface determinations
1 sender agrement
2 reciver sgrements
one for IP to ECC
and IP to SOAPregards,
ganesh

Doc on Async and Sync using BPM

Hi all
Can anyone send some docs explaining the steps involved in bridging async and sync interface using BPM. The source adapter is JDBC and target is proxy. I've already checked one blog by krishna moorthy (File-File using BPM) and based on that i tried but coudnt get the expected result for my scenario.
Thkx

Hi PS,
in your Integration Repository go to:
Software Component: SAP BASIS
Namespace: http://sap.com/xi/XI/System/Patterns
Process: BpmPatternSyncAsyncBridge
This is a very good example!
Regards Mario

Async to Sync Scenario

Hi Experts,
I am doing async JDBC to sync webservice scenario.
I did create async interface for JDBC and sync interface for webservice.
my scenario is i just want to see the response from webservice in XI for trouble shoot, i dont need to send the response message to database.
can anyone tell me how can we do it without using BPM (async to sync bridge).
Kind Regards,
kiran

Hi
Please go through below steps now
I have added the comments with same in bold font
Data Types: JDBC_DT,File_DT
Message Types: JDBC_MT,File_MT
Message Interfaces:
JDBC_OUT_MI(outbound,async),This should be Sync given MT_File as respo
File_MI(inbound,async), Dont use this
WS_IN_MI(inbound,sync,input=WS_req,output=WS_resp)
WS_resp_MI(outbound,async,WS_resp), -----No need of this
Message Mappings:
JDBC_WS_req_MM
(JDBC_OUT(JDBC_MT)------->WS_IN_MI(WS_req) ).
*Here WS_IN_MM msg. mapping should be used insted of*
*WS_IN_MI i.e message interface*
*WS_File_Res_MM*
(WS_Res(Source -- Ws_res) ---> File_MT)
Interface Mapping: JDBC_WS_req_IM(source=JDBC_OUT_MI,target=WS_IN_MI)
In IM you need to use the above one only
Here you have two tabs as Request & Response, Request will be normal as
it is JDBC_MT to WS_Req with proper mapping
*In Response use File_MT <--- Ws_RES with appropriate mapping *
For ID configuration refer below sample scenario,
It is File1 to RFC to File2- Just in your scenario it is JDBC>WS--->File2
So refer and do necessary changes
From SP 19 on XI 3.0 and SP 10 on PI 7.0, a File - RFC - File ( Asynch - Synch ) scenario can be done without a BPM.
Steps:
Integration Repository
The Integration Repository will be similar to any Synchronous Scenario ( say HTTP - RFC ) . 1 Outbound Synch message Interface and 1 Inbound Synch Message Interface.
Integration Directory
This is where a few differences lie, so let me take some time.
1. The Receiver Determination , Interface Determination will be the same as in HTTP - RFC synch scenario. Create the Sender File Adapter, Receiver RFC Adapter and Receiver File Adapter.
2. Sender Agreement will be for the Sender File Adapter. Sender Agreement uses the Synch Outbound Message Interface.
3. Receiver Agreement will be for the Receiver RFC adapter. Receievr Agreement will use the RFC as thge Inbound Message Interface.
4. We need to add a few modules in the Sender File Adapter.
Go to the Modules Tab of the Sender File Adater, and add the following modules in the same sequence,
Number - ModuleName - Type - ModuleKey
code1- AF_Modules/RequestResponseBean - Local Enterprise Bean - 1
2- CallSapAdapter-Local Enterprise Bean - 2
3-AF_Modules/ResponseOnewayBean-3[/code]
Parameters
ModuleKey - ParameterName - ParameterValue
code1 - passThrough - true
3-receiverChannel - Receiver File Adapter Name
3-receiverService - Receiver Business Service/ System[/code]
With this configuration, you can now handle the requirement without a BPM
This feature been already blogged for JMS Adapters in these blogs ,
Sync/Async communication in JMS adapter without BPM (SP19)
/people/venkataramanan.parameswaran/blog/2007/01/18/syncasync-communication-in-jms-adapter-without-bpm-sp19
Async/Sync Communication using JMS adapter without BPM (SP 19)
/people/sudheer.babu2/blog/2007/01/18/asyncsync-communication-using-jms-adapter-without-bpm-sp-19
Dynamic Configuration is also possible,and this as well as many other options are discussed in the How To guide - "How To Realize a sync-async and async-sync
bridge within the Adapter Framework" available on the Service Market Place.
For info on the Modules used here, look into these links,
Request Response Bean
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/45/20c210c20a0732e10000000a155369/content.htm
Response Oneway Bean
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/45/20cc5dc2180733e10000000a155369/content.htm
Hope this info helps,
Thanks
Swarup

How to change async to sync after deploying the process.? Thanks

How to change async to sync after deploying the process.? Thanks

you'd need to change the base wsdl, the generated one (_Name.wsdl) and the bpel.file .. and remove the generated classes .. (all in domains/you_domain/tmp/your_process dir)
the wsdl needs to get the output msg to the input msg instead of a callback porttype, the same needs to be in the generated wsdl (don't forget to remove the callback role in plnk session).. and the bpel process needs to have a reply instead of the invoke ..
this is what you would need to do .. BUT, maybe we can find a better solution for you, if you elaborate on the usecase..
during design time this is easier :-)
regards clemens

Idoc (async) - soap (sync) - file (async)

Hi.
I have a flow from idoc (async) to webservice (soap sync) and I want the response from soap to be written in file (async).
I want to do this without BPM and I have read some posts about using modules RequestResponseBean and ResponseOnewayBean.
Can someone help me with this step by step.
I have in ESR a OM that is async because of the outbound Idoc. Do I need a sync OM for the soap call and another async OM for the response to the file.
Where do I need to put the modules? In the SOAP receiver?
I know there are some threads that cover some of this but I couldn't find any that cover the whole of my issue step by step.
Regards,
Hjortur

Yes doing async to sync is possible without bpm. YOu already got the design solution.
>Where do I need to put the modules? In the SOAP receiver?
Sender Channel. In your case you might not need channel for idoc but for this configuration you might need to create one. That is my guess.
In the module section sequence as follows
1) AF_Modules/RequestResponseBean   Type: Local Enterprise Bean    Module key   1
2) CallSapAdapter                Type Local Enterprise Bean    Module Key 2
3) AF_Modules/ResponseOnewayBean     Type Local Enterprise Bean Module Key   3
Plus follow the link given by shabarish as reference.

IDOC to Webservice to Email - Async to Sync Scenario

Dear Experts,
I have a scenario: IDOC to Webservice (Async to Sync)
The response from the webservice needs to be sent via email. So I have a Email channel added to the Business service (ECC).
I tried this with BPM, but it does not work complaining about multiple receivers in a sync receiver interface.
Anyone has done similar to the above?
1. Using BPM?
2. Without BPM?
Thank you.

Thank you for the reply. This is what I have:
Repository:
1. Async ABS Interface for webservice request message
2. Sync ABS interface with webservice request message and response message
3. Async ABS interface for the reposnse message
5. Async IB interface for hte email message
4. Message mapping between IDOC and webservice request message
5. Message mapping between webservice response message and email message
6. 2 Interface mappings with the above mapping objects
7. Integration Process BPM with Receive step (Async w/s req), Sync send step (w/s req and respp) and Async send step (w/s response)
Directory:
1. Receiver agreement with BPM as sender and Webservice as receiver with SOAP receiver channel
2. Receiver agreement with BPM as sender and ECC as receiver with email receiver adapter
3. Interface determination for request mapping
4. Interface detrmination for response mapping
5. Receiver determination with ECC as sender and BPM as receiver
6. Receiver determaination with BPM as sender and Webservice as receiver
7. Receiver determination with Webservice as sender and ECC as receiver
is the above sufficient and right?
Thank you.

Advantage of DMS over "Services for object" functionality

Hi Experts,
I have got very basic doubt about advantages of DMS Over existing standard functionality of SAP.
We can attach documents or files to SAP Objects using "services for object" push button ( Next to title bar).
So please answer for my below queries
1. What is the disadvantage of using Services for Object??
2. If I use services for object, then file is stored in SAP Data base or in my local drive??
Thanks and Regards,
Kiran T

Hello ,
DMS Vs GOS
DMS- Document Management System
The Document Management System (DMS) in SAP R/3 offers the following distinct advantages over the current procedures and systems.
u2022     It avoids data redundancy, maintains consistency of data and minimizes the workload involved in entering and updating data.
u2022     In order to use large databases to the full, it is required to exchange data quickly and securely. Data can be accessed directly using electronic search tools, or find documents using known parameters.
u2022     Document distribution functionality (SAP-Workflow functionality is required)
The SAP R/3 Document Management System meets all these demanding requirements. In addition to managing documents, it also coordinates document processing. It is possible to automate the entire life cycle of a document: from document creation to document storage, its access and its update. Each document can be accessed immediately from any computer on the netwerk.
GOS-
All these DMS advantages are not available with GOS.
The Detailed PPT of comparison is sent to your id.
Regards
fapreeth

Advantages of BPC over BI-IP

Dear All,
I am new to BPC NW and would like your expert views on some of my observations on the much debated advantages of BPC over BI IP.
One of the benefits of BI IP was the integrated reporting capabilities with a common master data and combining the transaction data (actual and budget). However, as I understand BPC is intentionally not integrated with backend BW.
BW master data is different and separate from BPC master data, thus it is not possible to integrate BPC cubes with BW cubes. To view an actual vs plan comparison, data would need to be copied / loaded back and forth between the BW cubes and BPC cubes. However, it does not seem practical in scenarios where planning requires significant amount of actual data. Moreover, this would mean multiple reporting interfaces for the users.
BPC will be driven by Business users.
What is it that we are empowering the business users with? The ability to define his own dimensions / applications/ dimension members / Input schedules?
Usually planning requirement is not just a simple input enabled screen. There are many more functionalities that would be required which would need writing of logic, code etc. Loading of master / transaction data requires creation of transformation, conversion files and data packages. Obviously, these tasks would not be done by the business users.
To be honest, I am slightly concerned over giving the business user a free reign on creating objects in the system. Without proper training, things could get out of hand with duplicate objects popping up everywhere in the system. Another area of concern is possibility of modeling same data differently in BPC and BW. It might cause complexities while integrating the data between the two
BPC seem to be targeted to facilitate financial planning. However, we require planning for areas outside finance (headcount, volume allocation / distribution etc). I would have assumed that a reporting application of Type u2018Genericu2019 would have the flexibility to include only the required dimensions as opposed to having to include the standard dimensions of type A, E, T and C.
When compared to BI IP, I am not sure if BPC NW in its current form would be the best tool to deliver integrated planning in multiple areas.
Having said that, these are still early days for BPC NW. Hopefully we will see a tighter integration of BPC NW with BW and more flexible planning in non-financial areas in the future releases.

Thank you for your statement regarding the issues of using BPC in the context of BW. I very much appreciate your excellent comments.
Also thank you for providing the link to the statement about the advantages of using BPC because of the Excel user interface. It certainly does appear that SAP marketing is trying to get customers to move to Business Objects and BPC. Of course, it would be a strong advantage to be able to leverage the existing skills of Excel users.
We already own Integrated Planning and it appears to satisfy the immediate business requirements. We would have to pay for the software licences for BPC, which we don't currently own. Of course, we don't want to pay for these BPC licenses when we already own the IP licenses that will satisfy the requirements.
In addition, it indeed looks as though SAP is positioning BPC to use the Business Objects universe. Although we know that, eventually, we will probably have to convert to selected components of Business Objects for business intelligence, we don't want to have to once again make another substantial investment in SAP business intelligence when we so recently made such a large investment in the SAP Business Information Warehouse. We will have not yet earned our return on investment on the Business Informastion Warehouse.
Given the timing, we don't think it is fair that SAP expects companies to once again have to pay for the business intelligence software and to implement Business Objects, convert from the Business Information Warehouse to Business Objects, redevelop, retrain, and redeploy all the reports using the Business Objects tools. The customers will incur additional costs because of the reimplementation, conversion, redevelopment, retaining, and redeployment of the reports. Without this kind of consideration, in these economic times, it will be difficult for the installed base of companies to justify the conversion to Business Objects, and, consequently, for SAP to realize a reasonable return on its, not insignificant, investment in Business Objects.
SAP should provide an existing customer of the components of the Business Information Warehouse a migration path to the corresponding Business Objects components of comparable capabilities at no additional license fee as long as the customer is current on its maintenance. Of course, adjustments in the license fees and annual maintenance fees should be made if there are differences in functional and/or quality capabilities between the corresponding components of the Business Information Warehouse and Business Objects.
In our situation, we already and recently made a significant investment in the Business Information Warehouse and the Business Explorer (BEx) tools, implementation, and reports development. We don't want to have to pay to replace them with Business Objects. We thought we already paid big-time for the business intelligence tools and reports. We even paid for the BI Accelerator and have been very happy with its dramatic improvement on performance. We fear that a commitment to BPC may soon commit us to Business Objects, the latter of which, so far, carries a very large price.

Advantages of HANA over BWA

Hi,
I am currently working on my thesis on the topic SAP BW on SAP HANA.
One of the topics that i want to emphasize is on the technical and the functional advantages of HANA over BWA.
P.S: I have collected some points after going through most of your discussions but i would welcome your opinions on the same.
Thank you.
Regards,
Joe

Interesting Question.
As far a an opinion is concerned;
I posed this question to a Google search.
" what are functional advantages SAP BW vs SAP HANA   "
The Resultant listing.
[   https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=what%20are%20functional%20advantages%20SAP%20BW%20vs%20SAP%20HANA       ]
The first url answer is; Why SAP-HANA should start replacing BW!, SCN 2012.
The third; Does HANA Replace BW, (hint NO).
As you are writing an academic paper this could be the answer. My opinion there are none, no advantages.
From a current global ROI business perspective list the pros and cons for each, SAP BW and SAP HANA. My own opinion ten pros for SAP HANA;
1) Newer technology
2) Easier to deploy in the cloud
3) More head room, going forward bigger OLTP capacity.
4) Simple presentation of end result to you customer.
5) Show the customer an iPad with the solution running.
6) Show a youTube video with the SAP HANA cloud solution running
in side an e-mail.
7)   SAP HANA cloud solution is more affordable to smaller companys, $10 million to $100 million annual sales.
8)   A cloud deployment of SAP HANA localized by region based on language and culture.
9) I prefer SAP HANA cloud and mobile application deployment.
10) Current market conditions are move to mobile applications.
There are plenty of consultants that will point out the flaws in the above. And we can reduce the question to a matter of semantics.
But I hope this helps you and you can use it.

Failed to determine receiver - Async to Sync communication

Hello,
I have a setup in which IDoc flows from R/3 to XI to destination through HTTP. Being Async to Sync a BPM is put in place. This flow runs fine.
We tried adding one more receiver to the existing setup. The sender is the same as in the above mentioned flow. The receiver determination is failing. A separate receiver determination was configured for the second flow. The error message is "NO_RECEIVER_CASE_BE". We checked the entire configuration settings. Everything appears fine. Why is the receiver determination failing ? None of the solutions existing provides an answer that works. Any clues ?
Early answers would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Warm Regards,
IS / Siva

In the same receiver determination, with no condition, just add an additional receiver. Create interface determination and receiver agreement for the corresponding receiver. Activate all objects and try again with your input.
Hope this works..
Regards,
Parvathy

Can you explain steps in the Async and Sync scenarios JDBC to RFC.

Hi,
Can you explain some basic steps in the Async and Sync scenarios for sending data from JDBC to RFC.
Like,
The data is picked up from the database table through JDBC adapter.
It is passed on to SAP by calling the RFC. RFC gets executed
successfully. The status is returned by the RFC. The status needs to be
updated back into the SQL database table.
Is this a sync case or async case.
What si the diffrences in the sync and async scenarios in the above JDBC to RFC scenarios.
Soorya

hi check the below link
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/5474f19e-0701-0010-4eaa-97c4f78dbf9b
JDBC Synchronous call using BPM
Data Types -
1) File Input
2) JDBC Req
3) JDBC Response
4) File Response of similar type of JDBC Response.. ( This you can avoid also..let it be for first time)
Message Types
4 for each data type
Message Interfaces
1) Async, Outbound, Interface, to receieve the file
2) Async, Inbound , Interface to send the file from XI
3) Async, Absract , Interface of type File message type to recieve the message in the BPM
4) Sync, Abstract Interface with Req message type as File Request, and Response Message type as a file Response
5) Sync , Inbound interface for JDBC with Input message type as a JDBC Request and Output Message type as a JDBC Response
Message Mapping:
1)Mapping between File Req to the JDBC req
2) JDBC Response to File Response
Interface mapping:
1) Sender Interface as a Sync,Abstract Interface created for the file type and target interface as Synchrnous JDBC interface.
Use corresponding mapping for Req and Resp..
note:reward points if solution found helpfull.....
regards
chandrakanth.k

Advantages of java over c++

Hello to all.
Can you please point me out some advantages on using java instead of C++?
For example having the garbage collector (java) instead of cancelling by hand the objects created (c++) slows down a little the execution of the program but prevents of cancelling object still in use.
What about the impossibility of multi-inheritance and overloading of the operators?
The fact that there are no header files has an advantage?
Is it true that thread priorities and scheduling are not portable?
Is it true that there are not templates in Java?
Packages offered by java do substitude for example the STL c++ templates?
Are there any other evident advantages of java over C++
I apreciate any hint and opinion
Thanks in advance
Mandy

Hi,
What about the impossibility of multi-inheritance and
overloading of the operators?Doesn't matter that much. And bad programmer can write bad code in any language.
The fact that there are no header files has an
advantage?It might be a bit easier, but it doesn't matter that much.
Is it true that thread priorities and scheduling are
not portable?Yes
Is it true that there are not templates in Java?Yes, and no. There are generics in JDK 1.5.
Packages offered by java do substitude for example the
STL c++ templates?I'd say that this is the big difference.
In java It's very easy to develop a full blown application with networking, and ui in a short time. I don't have any links to provide (but I guess you could use google to find facts), but I think the development time in java is much shorted than in c++.
Are there any other evident advantages of java over
C++It's easier to run the java application on multiple platforms. The advantage to c++ is that it can be used to write drivers, applications with small footprints, and to access native functions/APIs to the platform.
/Kaj

Advantages of VISA over GPIB

i want to know advantages of VISA over GPIB in labview when we connect our pc with a device which has GPIB interface
what could be reason behind using VISA programming
i want atleast 5 advantages of visa over GPIB .
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Hi,
1.VISA Write is equivalent to a GPIB write except the VISA Write returns a VISA Reference Out that is much easier to use. You pass that to the next VISA function instead of wiring a GPIB address to all.This will make your blockdiagram cleaner.
2.portability:-VISA supports GPIB, Serial, Ethernet, USB, PXI, VXI, and PCI. So, with a single piece of code, you can support all of the interfaces and even GPIB controllers from different vendors.
3.VISA supports aliases. You can assign logical names to the resources. Instead of trying to remember the GPIB address in a rack full of instruments, you can reference 'DMM', 'Scope', etc.
4. If you are programming multiple devices that communicate over more than one bus type, it might be easier to use VISA for your entire system.
5. In VISA, you must always call viEnableEvent() prior to being allowed to receive events, this is required in VISA to avoid the race condition of trying to wait on events for which the hardware may not be enabled.
6.The VISA Resource Control allows you to pick from a list of available resources.
Enough
Thanks as kudos only

Advantage of Async over Sync Intereface

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for