BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE lock issue with no access to ABAP!

Hello everyone,
I have written a class in vb .NET that uses the BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE to post goods issues. I have done numerous tests myself which all were successful. However, when a colleague wanted to test my class he suddenly got the following error "The plant data of the material <XXXX> is locked by the user <XXXX>". The user specified is the standard background user we use for RFCs. So basically the user is blocking himself.
This issue seems to be quite common as Google turns up with numerous results. They either end up with people being desperate and giving up or finding solutions in ABAP. However, my team has no access to ABAP since SAP-programming has all been outsourced to India. Getting any changes done in ABAP will be a long and tedious progress for which we simply do not have the time.
Is there anyway to resolve this issue on our side? Maybe through other RFCs or changes in how we handle the BAPI? I am quite desperate as this problem occurred shortly before we wanted to go live and now it is not sure we can even do anything on our side.

Hi Tom,
If you want to call DEQUEUE_ALL from vb.net then tell your ABAP counterpart to create a new remote enabled function module and he can subsequently make a call to DEQUEUE_ALL in the custom developed function module through ABAP. You can then call the newly created custom function module using its calling parameter.
Also, if required he can expose that newly custom created function module as a webservice that you can call from vb.net.
I hope its clear to you now about how can you access it from vb.net.
Regards,
Sachin

Similar Messages

[ADF-11.1.2] Locking issue with SQL 92

I see one Locking issue with SQL92 Oracle ADF Application.
ADF Version: [ADF-11.1.2]
Database: Oracle 10g Express Edition
Situation 1:
With Following setting:
File: Application Resource > Description > ADF META-INF > adf-config.xml
    <startup>
      <amconfig-overrides>
        <config:Database jbo.SQLBuilder="SQL92" jbo.locking.mode="optimistic"/>
      </amconfig-overrides>
    </startup>I have a page showing record 'x' of view object. I open same record on another page. Now I have same record showing on two different tabs of browser.
1. I modify first record and save it. It worked... Got commited to database.
2. I goto second tab and modify same record and tried to same it. It throws me an error - Another user has changed the row with primary key oracle.jbo.Key[38 ] . As expected...
3. I then, reopen the same record on 3rd tab of browser. Modify it and tried to save it. It just hang... as if it is processing the record endlessly.
If I see the Log:
<BaseSQLBuilderImpl> <doEntitySelectForAltKey> [312] BaseSQLBuilderImpl Executing doEntitySelect ... (true)
<BaseSQLBuilderImpl> <doEntitySelectForAltKey> [313] Generating new LOCK statement
<BaseSQLBuilderImpl> <buildSelectString> [314] Built select: 'SELECT ID, CI_ID, COLUMN_NAME, DISPLAY_COLUMN_NAME, COLUMN_VALUE, CREATE_DATE, CREATE_BY FROM ESUSER.CI_AUDIT'
<BaseSQLBuilderImpl> <doEntitySelectForAltKey> [315] Executing LOCK "SELECT ID, CI_ID, COLUMN_NAME, DISPLAY_COLUMN_NAME, COLUMN_VALUE, CREATE_DATE, CREATE_BY FROM ESUSER.CI_AUDIT WHERE ID=? FOR UPDATE"
<BaseSQLBuilderImpl> <bindWhereAttrValue> [316] Where binding param 1: 38
That's it.. nothing happens further.. If I execute above query on SQL Worksheet, it doesn't come up with the result. Just hang for something...
SELECT ID, CI_ID, COLUMN_NAME, DISPLAY_COLUMN_NAME, COLUMN_VALUE, CREATE_DATE, CREATE_BY FROM ESUSER.CI_AUDIT WHERE ID='38' FOR UPDATE I can execute above query for other record of same table but not '38'. Even if I fire commit command to database, it is not working.
I have to restart the database services to bring everything to normal state.
Situation 2:
With Oracle as Database :
    <startup>
      <amconfig-overrides>
        <config:Database jbo.SQLBuilder="Oracle" jbo.locking.mode="optimistic"/>
      </amconfig-overrides>
    </startup>Everything is working file. i.e. at step 3, record is getting modified successfully with following log:
<OracleSQLBuilderImpl> <doEntitySelectForAltKey> [27] OracleSQLBuilder Executing doEntitySelect on: ESUSER.CI_AUDIT (true)
<ADFLogger> <begin> Entity read all attributes
<OracleSQLBuilderImpl> <buildSelectString> [28] Built select: 'SELECT ID, CI_ID, COLUMN_NAME, DISPLAY_COLUMN_NAME, COLUMN_VALUE, CREATE_DATE, CREATE_BY FROM ESUSER.CI_AUDIT CIAudit'
<OracleSQLBuilderImpl> <doEntitySelectForAltKey> [29] Executing LOCK...SELECT ID, CI_ID, COLUMN_NAME, DISPLAY_COLUMN_NAME, COLUMN_VALUE, CREATE_DATE, CREATE_BY FROM ESUSER.CI_AUDIT CIAudit WHERE ID=? FOR UPDATE NOWAIT
<ADFLogger> <addContextData> Entity read all attributes
<OracleSQLBuilderImpl> <bindWhereAttrValue> [30] Where binding param 1: 38
<ADFLogger> <addContextData> Entity read all attributes
<ADFLogger> <end> Entity read all attributes
<ADFLogger> <end> Lock Entity
<ADFLogger> <begin> Before posting the entity's changes
<ADFLogger> <begin> Updating audit columns
<ADFLogger> <end> Updating audit columns
<ADFLogger> <end> Before posting the entity's changes
<OracleSQLBuilderImpl> <doEntityDML> [31] OracleSQLBuilder Executing, Lock 2 DML on: ESUSER.CI_AUDIT (Update)
<OracleSQLBuilderImpl> <buildUpdateStatement> [32] UPDATE buf CIAudit>#u SQLStmtBufLen: 210, actual=60
<OracleSQLBuilderImpl> <doEntityDML> [33] UPDATE ESUSER.CI_AUDIT CIAudit SET COLUMN_VALUE=? WHERE ID=?
<ADFLogger> <begin> Entity DML
<OracleSQLBuilderImpl> <bindUpdateStatement> [34] Update binding param 1: cip7ri1
<OracleSQLBuilderImpl> <bindWhereAttrValue> [35] Where binding param 2: 38
<ADFLogger> <addContextData> Entity DML
<ADFLogger> <end> Entity DML
Can any one please tell me, what is the issue with SQL92 setting ?
Edited by: Anandsagar Sah on Mar 11, 2012 8:10 AM

The framework works correctly in the Situation #1. Please, note that the locking statement in this case is "SELECT ... FOR UPDATE", but not "SELECT ... FOR UPDATE NOWAIT" (as it is in the Situation #2). When you entered the 2nd tab and tried to update the row, then the framework executed the locking statement and the row was locked (and it remained locked because the framework detected that another user had modified the row, so it stopped the processing and no COMMIT operation was executed). When you entered the 3rd tab and tried to update the row, then the framework tried to lock the row againg, but the locking statement was blocked by the existign lock and it started waiting on the lock from the 2nd tab. So this is expected behaviour.
The interesting question is why you do not get any error in the Situation #2. In my opinion you should get an error because the locking statement from the 3rd tab should fail immediately (because the row should have been locked from the 2nd tab and the locking statement is with NOWAIT option). I suspect that when the DB is Oracle and you use Oracle SQLBuilder, then the ADF issues a DB savepoint at the beginning of the DML operation and rolls back to the savepoint is a case of some failure, so the 2nd tab has not left any lock. You can check this by setting on SQL trace on the DB server.
Dimitar

Issue with assistive access not keeping permissions

Since a recent upgrade (likely from OS X 10.9.x to 10.10.2) I've had issues with Assistive Access blocking Automator and Applescript from interaction with dialogs.
If I run my script or my Automator workflow (which basically has the same script in it) I get the error:
System Events got an error: Automator is not allowed assistive access. (in the case of Automator).
If I open Automator, and then untick and retick the Automator entry in the Accessibility options within Security & Privacy (System Preferences), then workflow can run again. It continues to work until I Quit Automator. Then it's as if OS X no longer trusts Automator to be the same app I gave Accessibility permissions to. And the situation repeats. It's much as if it were not code-signed. The exact same issue plays out with Apple Script.
I came across this info, which I hoped would solve the problem, but it made no difference: http://macscripter.net/viewtopic.php?id=43394 and http://bit.ly/1x3SRmc
In my Accessibility permissions I now have:
Script Editor
Automator
1Password 5 (which the script interacts with)
com.apple.security.agentStub.xpc (in case that's being called up and triggering the Accessibility issue)
osascript (in case that's handling the script and triggering the Accessibility issue)
SecurityAgent.xpc (in case that was triggering the Accessibility issue)
I added all these because the post at http://bit.ly/1x3SRmc indicated that anything Apple Script is interacting with needs Accessibility access permissions.
My script is as follows:
set appName to "SecurityAgent"
set passApp to "1Password 5" (* set this to the name of your password manager *)
tell application "System Events"
if not (exists window 1 of process appName) then -- test if SecurityAgent window exists
set answer to display dialog "The password dialog was not found. Please check." buttons {"Ok"}
return -- abort if SecurityAgent window does not exist
end if
end tell
tell application "System Events"
set position of window 1 of process appName to {10, 10}
-- move SecurityAgent window out of the way
end tell
activate application passApp
tell application "System Events"
tell application "SystemUIServer"
set answer to display dialog "Make sure correct 1Password item is actively selected (i.e. click it again if it was previously selected), then click “Continue” to proceed." buttons {"Continue"}
end tell
tell process passApp
(* If you are not using 1Password, you may need to change the menu item clicks, below, to whatever is correct in your particular password manager *)
click menu item "copy password" of menu "item" of menu bar 1
delay 1
set appData to the clipboard
end tell
tell application "System Events"
tell process appName
set value of text field 1 of window 1 to appData
if exists (text field 2 of window 1) then
set value of text field 2 of window 1 to appData
if exists checkbox 1 of window 1 then
if value of checkbox 1 of window 1 is 1 then
click checkbox 1 of window 1
end if
end if
set value of checkbox 1 of window 1 to 0
delay 1 (* gives a moment to see what's going on *)
click button "OK" of window 1
else
if value of checkbox 1 of window 1 is 1 then
click checkbox 1 of window 1
end if
delay 1 (* gives a moment to see what's going on *)
click button "OK" of window 1
end if
end tell
end tell
end tell
In Automator it would appear the script is generating an error as soon as it reaches line 5, "if not (exists window 1 of process appName) then"
I would greatly appreciate some assistance in resolving this issue.

Starting with Mavericks, Apple changed the way that the accessibility works (see Using AppleScript with Accessibility and Security features in Mavericks) - each individual application needs to be given access, instead of a global option. A regular AppleScript application saves properties and global variables with the script, which makes it a new application as far as the system security is concerned, so it needs to be re-added to the accessibility list. To work with this new security feature, you need to code-sign your AppleScript application or make the script(s) in the bundle read-only so that they don't get changed (note that an AppleScript-based project in Xcode does not modify the application bundle by saving properties and globals).

Serious locking issues with Main Stage 3

Having serious locking issues with main stage 3. I just did a music gig over the weekend with main stage 3, and the application locked up 8 times during my performance. There were also several times where there was a delay between the time I struck a key on the midi controller and the time sound actually came out of the audio interface. Has anyone else ran into this problem??
10.
I am running mountain lion 10.8.5, on a 2009 Macbook 2.53 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo. w 8 GB Ram.
Anyone know how to fix this, if even possible?

Just read some reviews. There seems to be a lot of problems with the latest main stage update. I didn't notice these latency problems until did the latest update..
Apple please fix this quickly!!!

Locking issue with BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE in userexit_save_document

Hello All,
I am performing a separate goods movement for one of the materials in the delivery userexit_save_document during PGI. I have an issue. We might have multiple users trying to PGI deliveries and thereby performing the goods movement for the same material through the BAPI in the userexit_save_document.
How do I prevent the locking issue when say two users go through the BAPI for goods movement for the same material data at the same time.
Any answer in this regards is highly appreciated.
Thanks,
Mathangi

Thanks Rich... this make work for me, but one question -
Do you know if this function releases all lock objects for the user system wide or only for the current session? My concern is that if it is system wide, then I could be releasing lock objects for other sessions unintentionally. For example, if there are multiple RFC calls in parallel for the same function and same user then I could be destroying lock entries that I shouldn't be! I am hoping that it removes lock entries only for the current session...
any ideas?
Regards,
Lee
> I've used this BAPI in many of my programs, and
> always after the call, I code.....
>
>
>
> commit work and wait.
> call function 'DEQUEUE_ALL'.
>
>
>
> The DEQUEUE_ALL show release any/all locks.
>
>
> Regards,
> Rich Heilman

Row locking issue with version enabled tables

I've been testing the effect of locking in version enabled tables in order to assess workspace manager restrictions when updating records in different workspaces and I have encountered a locking problem where I can't seem to update different records of the same table in different sessions if these same records have been previously updated & committed in another workspace.
I'm running the tests on 11.2.0.3. I have ROW_LEVEL_LOCKING set to ON.
Here's a simple test case (I have many other test cases which fail as well but understanding why this one causes a locking problem will help me understand the results from my other test cases):
--Change tablespace names as required
create table t1 (id varchar2(36) not null, name varchar2(50) not null) tablespace XXX;
alter table t1 add constraint t1_pk primary key (id) using index tablespace XXX;
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
insert into t1 values ('1', 'name1');
insert into t1 values ('2', 'name2');
insert into t1 values ('3', 'name3');
commit;
exec dbms_wm.enableversioning('t1');
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
exec dbms_wm.createworkspace('TESTWSM1');
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('TESTWSM1');
--update 2 records in a non-LIVE workspace in preparation for updating in different workspaces later
update t1 set name = name||'changed' where id in ('1', '2');
commit;
quit;
--Now in a separate session (called session 1 for this example) run the following without committing the changes:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '1';
--Now in another session (session 2) update a different record from the same table. The below update will hang waiting on the transaction in session 1 to complete (via commit/rollback):
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '2';
I'm surprised records of different ids can't be updated in different sessions i.e. why does session 1 lock the update of record 2 which is not being updated anywhere else. I've tried this using different non-LIVE workspaces with similar results. I've tried changing table properties e.g. initrans with and still get a lock. The changes to table properties are successfully propagated to the _LT tables but not all the related workspace manager tables created for table T1 above. I'm not sure if this is the issue.
Note an example of the background workspace manager query that may create the lock is something like:
UPDATE TESTWSM.T1_LT SET LTLOCK = WMSYS.LT_CTX_PKG.CHECKNGETLOCK(:B6 , LTLOCK, NEXTVER, :B3 , 0,'UPDATE', VERSION, DELSTATUS, :B5 ), NEXTVER = WMSYS.LT_CTX_PKG.GETNEXTVER(NEXTVER,:B4 ,VERSION,:B3 ,:B2 ,683) WHERE ROWID = :B1
Any help with this will be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Hi Ben,
Thanks for your quick response.
I've tested your suggestion and it does work with 2 workspaces but the same problem is enountered when additional workspaces are created.
It seems if multiple workspaces are used in a multi user environment, locks will be inevitable which will degrade performance especially if a long transaction is used.
Deadlocks can also be encountered where eventually one of the sessions is rolled back by the database.
Is there a way of avoiding this e.g. by controlling the creation of workspaces and table updates?
I've updated my test case below to demonstrate the extra workspace locking issue.
--change tablespace name as required
create table t1 (id varchar2(36) not null, name varchar2(50) not null) tablespace XXX;
alter table t1 add constraint t1_pk primary key (id) using index tablespace XXX;
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
insert into t1 values ('1', 'name1');
insert into t1 values ('2', 'name2');
insert into t1 values ('3', 'name3');
commit;
exec dbms_wm.enableversioning('t1');
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
exec dbms_wm.createworkspace('TESTWSM1');
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('TESTWSM1');
update t1 set name = name||'changed' where id in ('1', '2');
commit;
Session 1:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '1';
session 2:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '2';
--end of original test case, start of additional workspace locking issue:
Session 1:
rollback;
Session 2:
rollback;
--update record in both workspaces
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '3';
commit;
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('TESTWSM1');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '3';
commit;
Session 1:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '1';
session 2:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '2';
Session 1:
rollback;
Session 2:
rollback;
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
exec dbms_wm.createworkspace('TESTWSM2');
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('TESTWSM2');
update t1 set name = name||'changed2' where id in ('1', '2');
commit;
Session 1:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '1';
--this now gets locked out by session 1
session 2:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '2';
Session 1:
rollback;
Session 2:
rollback;
--update record 3 in TESTWSM2
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('TESTWSM2');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '3';
commit;
Session 1:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '1';
--this is still locked out by session 1
session 2:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '2';
Session 1:
rollback;
Session 2:
rollback;
--try updating LIVE
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '3';
commit;
Session 1:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '1';
--this is still locked out by session 1
session 2:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '2';
Session 1:
rollback;
Session 2:
rollback;
--try updating TESTWSM1 workspace too - so all have been updated since TESTWSM2 was created
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('TESTWSM1');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '3';
commit;
Session 1:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '1';
--this is still locked out by session 1
session 2:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '2';
Session 1:
rollback;
Session 2:
rollback;
--try updating every workspace afresh
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changedA' where id = '3';
commit;
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('TESTWSM1');
update t1 set name = 'changedB' where id = '3';
commit;
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('TESTWSM2');
update t1 set name = 'changedC' where id = '3';
commit;
Session 1:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '1';
--this is still locked out by session 1
session 2:
exec dbms_wm.gotoworkspace('LIVE');
update t1 set name = 'changed' where id = '2';
Session 1:
rollback;
Session 2:
rollback;

Triggering program form(subroutine) from MIGO using output types gives lock issue with Bapi_sag_change

Hi,
On creating the GR from MIGO tcode, based on the quantity check i am updating the field ELIKZ using BAPI_SAG_CHANGE.
And updation logic is written in a zprogram using with in FORM XXXXX...ENDFORM XXXXX. ( FORM XXXXX is configured in the output type ).
So the problem i am facing is on creation of the first GR with scheduling agreement number GR is posted successfully and under the output tab the i can see the green icon.
But on creation of the second GR with same scheduling agreement its showing red icon. The following is the error message " User locked the scheduling agreement ...."
I even tried using dequeue fm and transaction commit, but it didnt work. Please let me know how to over come the lock issue.
Thanks & regards,
Manojkumar K

Solved it myself....
Regards,
Manoj

Locking issue with BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE

Hello,
Has anybody ran across a problem of lock objects (related to materials) not getting released when BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE fails?
Here is the sequence of events:
1. I run my function (which calls BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE) in SE37 and force an error (i.e. return table contains entries). I do NOT leave SE37.
2. In another session I run the same test again (but with correct data). I get error M3 897 (The plant data of the material 3319 is locked by user USCLXH90).
By looking in SM12 after step 1 is finished, I have noticed that 2 lock entries do not get released. These lock entries subsequently cause the error in step 2.
Lock Object: ENQARRAY
Tables: MARC, MBEW
Arguments: material and plant used in my test
IMPORTANT NOTES:
A. These lock objects do finally get released once I completely exit SE37.
B. These lock objects get released immediately and automatically if step 1 is successful (in other words, it's only when there is an error do the lock objects remain!)
C. I do call BAPI_TRANSACTION_COMMIT. I have also tried using SET UPDATE TASK LOCAL. Neither makes any difference (I think these are irrelevant b/c there are no db updates anyway in step 1 b/c of the error I force).
D. We have seen this specific problem occur when calling the function via RFC from our web front end.
I couldn't find any OSS note that describes this problem. Anybody know how to guarantee that all lock objects get released in the case where BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE fails?
p.s. I am a doing a 541 movement type (although I don't think this problem is specific to movement types).
Thanks for any suggestions or insights anybody might have.
Regards,
Lee

Thanks Rich... this make work for me, but one question -
Do you know if this function releases all lock objects for the user system wide or only for the current session? My concern is that if it is system wide, then I could be releasing lock objects for other sessions unintentionally. For example, if there are multiple RFC calls in parallel for the same function and same user then I could be destroying lock entries that I shouldn't be! I am hoping that it removes lock entries only for the current session...
any ideas?
Regards,
Lee
> I've used this BAPI in many of my programs, and
> always after the call, I code.....
>
>
>
> commit work and wait.
> call function 'DEQUEUE_ALL'.
>
>
>
> The DEQUEUE_ALL show release any/all locks.
>
>
> Regards,
> Rich Heilman

Issue with web access in view administrator console after connection server 5.5 installation.

Hi All,
I am trying to bring up my setup with ESXi 5.5 and vcenter 5.5 U2. I made a DNS server and made two 2008 R2 machines and launched vcentre and connection manager on them.
After installing connection server 5.5, I am unable to open the web UI by clicking "view administrator console" icon on my desktop! I installed proper certificated and iis module too and confirmed that my https certificate is properly working. (snapshot attached, filename - snapshot_view_webpage.jpeg)
I google for the possible error and tried below mentioned links but none of them worked.
1.)    http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=2004759
Corrected this error but still system is in same shape and i am unable to get the console's admin webpage.
2.)    http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=2001277
In this method, my admin folder didn't got recreated as the service restart got stuck for a long time and throws error that service restart got time out!!(snapshot attached)
Can some one please help me to move forward. Please let me know if you need more information from my end.
Thanks,
Jeevan

Since the policy AKS is top in sequence under service selection rule so it should hit for sure. As you wrote that even after disabling the default device admin, then also request is hitting the same and restarting the ACS services resolved the issue. The symptoms of your issue are exactly same as stated in this defect.
CSCuo93378    Certain browsers cause ACS database corruption
Due to this issue we have seen cases where request hits the disable and default policies without any reason. Actually accessing ACS via chrome mess around with all the operators in conditions.
The only workaround is to access all the rules and conditions in supported browser. Ensure all the operators are correct, save the changes and restart the ACS services.
The issue seems to be fixed in ACS 5.5 patch 5
Regards,
Jatin

Weird File Locking Issue with Excel 2013

We are experiencing a strange issue whereby we are frequently unable to save Excel files; whilst working on a document a user will select Save As, change the name of the document and attempt to save, a 0KB file is created in the location and an error returned
to the user stating that the file is in use by another user. At this point it is normally possible to save but on occasion this has also failed. It is possible to duplicate the issue on multiple machines.
The user has Full control over the destination directory, both share & NTFS.
File Server is running Windows Server Essentials 2012R2.
The Users desktops are running Windows 7 sp1, all available Windows Updates have been applied.
They have an Office 2013 Small Business Premium subscription, two of the users have a full msi based installation of Office and one the Click-to-Run version.
They use Eset Endpoint Antivirus and Eset File Security on the server, the problem can be duplicated with both client & server antivirus disabled.
Have disabled power saving on client & server network cards.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to troubleshoot this?

Hi,
As far as I know, if one user had opened or edited one file in File Server, the other users only could be open the file read-only. It could not be saved or other behavior.I would suggest the following:
Turn off the Preview Pane, Details Pane and pop ups that show information about file and desktop items.
This is a problem that has been reported to affect Windows 7 clients only, not Windows XP. The problem here may have something to do with the Windows Explorer in Windows 7. We are currently investigating this further and will post more information as it
is available.
In a Windows Explorer window, do the following:
1. Right click on the Start Button.
2. Click 'Open Windows Explorer'.
3. At the top left click Organize > Layout
4. Uncheck Details Pane and Preview Pane.
5. On a Windows menu, click on Tools > Folder Options. In the box that opens up, click on the View tab. Scroll down the list to
“Show pop-up description for folder and desktop items” and clear the checkbox and then click OK.
http://blogs.technet.com/b/the_microsoft_excel_support_team_blog/archive/2012/05/14/the-definitive-locked-file-post.aspx
BTW, I recommend you
use a shared workbook to collaborate in Excel.
Regards,
George Zhao
TechNet Community Support

Issue with Teradata access from Business Objects AIX Machine

Hi,
I am using BO XI.31 which is installed on AIX 5.3 machine. I have installed Teradata driver on the machine and I have created the require ODBC.ini entry to point Teradata database. While refreshing the report I am getting below error message.
A database error occured .The database error test is (CS) "DBDriver failed ot load: /BOBJ/xi_3.1...Connectionserver/libdbd_tdodbc.so
0509-022 Cannot load module/BOBJ/xi_3.1....ConnectionServer/libdbd_tdodbc.so
0509-150 Dependent module libodbc.a(odbc.so) Could not be loaded.
0509-022 Cannot load module libodbc.a(odbc.so)
0509-022 System error:A file or directory in the path name does not exist.
Any body know what are the steps require to access teradata database from AIX box

Hi Jacks,
Following information might help you to resolve the issue.
This is caused by a wrong HOME environment variable of the user that starts the BO processes.
Resolution
Check the correct path of your BO 3.1 installation and export it as HOME environment variable:
Example:
BO 3.1 installation path: /home/<bouser>/bo3.1/Enterprise12.0../...
Type in the command line:
export HOME=/home/<bouser>/boversion
You can also change this environment variable permanently if you edit the .profile file of the BO user (home/<username>/.profile), adding the above line into the file, then source it again with:
. .profile
or with a logoff/logon of the session.
Check if the path of your HOME is correct with:
env | grep HOME
Now you can run the installation setup without any error.
Regards,
Sarbhjeet Kaur

Issue with changing Access Service in ACS 5.2

Hi,
I am working on lab setup where I installed ACS 5.2 I created new access service and used it in existing service selection rule (Rule-2) earlier but it didn't work. Later I created new service selection rule and applied new service access rule. However even after this change it keeps applying predefined default access access service. Please refer attached picture for better understanding.
As shown, I want Aks-Rule to work and apply service 'Lab-Policy' however it keeps referring Rule-2 and applies 'Default Device Admin' access service even after I disable it.
I have to restart ACS service from CLI console to make it work. Is this a bug or am I missing anything. Please advise guys.
Regards,
Akshay

Since the policy AKS is top in sequence under service selection rule so it should hit for sure. As you wrote that even after disabling the default device admin, then also request is hitting the same and restarting the ACS services resolved the issue. The symptoms of your issue are exactly same as stated in this defect.
CSCuo93378 Certain browsers cause ACS database corruption
Due to this issue we have seen cases where request hits the disable and default policies without any reason. Actually accessing ACS via chrome mess around with all the operators in conditions.
The only workaround is to access all the rules and conditions in supported browser. Ensure all the operators are correct, save the changes and restart the ACS services.
The issue seems to be fixed in ACS 5.5 patch 5
Regards,
Jatin

Issue with Data Access Profile

Hi Experts,
Facing issue while using Data Access Profiles:
I have created a data access profile ,giving access to only limited members for a particular model.
While logging in using a particular user id which is assigned to this data access profile I am able to see all the members for which the access is denied
and I am also able to manipulate the transaction data. But in data access profile I have provided only read access.
Recently,the system has been upgraded with a new support package after which we are facing the issue.
Please help us solving the issue.
BPC version: 10.0 NW
SP : 15
Best Regards,
Remya

Dear Ramya,
Again do the setting for data access profile. Sometime it will not refresh.
Regards,
Nanny

Bapi BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE lock issues

Hi all,
I have a problem with BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE, FM
I have using this to post goods movement type 309 & 321 and I am calling this in LOOP as there are more number of goods movement.
In each iteration i have to post the goods movement and after that i have to create the delivery using bdc MBRL Tcode.
The problem is the BAPI is locking the Material document number even after posting the goods movement for a while. Because of this the delivery creation is failing.
After BAPI i'm using BAPI commit work FM
I have used FM deque_all, but its not working. wait up to 2 secs.
Even the combination of deque_all & wait up to 2 secs is not working.
Is there anyother way to release locks?
Thanks

Hi,
Try this way ......
SET UPDATE TASK LOCAL.
if sy-subrc eq 0.
call function BAPI_GOODS_MVMT_CREATE
endif.
if return is initial with no errors then
SET UPDATE TASK LOCAL.
if sy-subrc eq 0.
call function 'BAPI_TRANSACTION_COMMIT'
          EXPORTING
            WAIT   = 'X'
          IMPORTING
            RETURN = return.
endif.

File Locking Issue with Concurrent Locks

Hi. I'm trying to implement a procedure using the File Lock class for two instances of the same program (running on different servers) accessing files shared over an NFS mount in Unix (this is using Java 1.5). 99% of the time, this works great. One box will get the lock, and the other will respect that lock and not touch the file. However, the other 1% of the time, both boxes seem to access the same file simultaniously, allowing BOTH to acquire locks on the same file.
I'm wondering if anyone has any advice on how to solve this problem. I've been searching all over but haven't found a solution. Like I said, the locking works most of the time - I've even independantly verified that it does (and that it's not just timing) with a test program. It's only when both programs access the file at the exact same does that there seems to be a problem.
If it helps, here is the gist of my code:
      FileLock javaLock = null;
      FileChannel fileChannel = null;
      for(int i = 0; i < fileArray.length; i++)
         javaLock = null;
         fileChannel = null;
         if(!fileArray.exists())
continue;
try
RandomAccessFile raLockFile = new RandomAccessFile(fileArray[i], "rw");
try
fileChannel = raLockFile.getChannel();
if(fileArray[i].exists())
javaLock = fileChannel.tryLock();
catch(OverlappingFileLockException ofle)
// Error printed here
continue;
catch(Exception e)
// Error
javaLock = null;
if(javaLock == null)
continue; // File is already locked, move to next one
// Processing is done on the file here
catch(Exception e)
// Error
finally
try
if(javaLock != null)
javaLock.release();
if(fileChannel != null)
fileChannel.close();
catch(Exception e)
// Error
Edited by: kksmith on Jul 21, 2008 7:31 AM
Edited by: kksmith on Jul 21, 2008 7:32 AM

I don't have the errors on hand at the moment, but most were File Not Found IOExceptions (because one box would finish processing the file and rename it out from under the other box). Using a bunch of System.out.println()s I was able to determine that both boxes were locking the same specific files producing those errors.
The other weird thing that would happen is that the file would be processed correctly on one box, but somehow leave behind a zero length version of itself, which the other box would finish processing normally as if we had received a zero length file (as we have special code in place for that condition). This is probably the biggest problem, since I can trap File Not Founds (though it's messy and kind of defeats the purpose of using locks to begin with), but I don't have a real easy way to catch this (and I can't just toss out all zero lengths because we want to know if we legitamently got a zero length file in).
As far as I can tell though, this problem doesn't occur outside of an NFS mount, but I haven't tested it extensively enough to be sure (since it's a random timing thing, it's difficult to reproduce outside of just dumping a ton of files on it). I'm not entirely sure how our NFS system in configured, since that is completely out of my hands (System Admins have contol over all of that). But I believe it has most of the latest patches.

BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE lock issue with no access to ABAP!

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for