Blocking validation

Hi
Does anyone know if blocking validations work on value Entity Currency only?
I have an application where the translation is performed in a customized way, and the client would like to have a blocking validation on Parent Currency value.
Thanks
Lilach

Hi Sonal,
The other approach will be to not authorize the users to the document type (which u require)
The following is the object for document type:
F_BKPF_BLA -
Accounting Document: Authorization for Document Types
Instead of *, include all the docs which u require the authorization for.
And for year...
Only open the year for the users u desire
Regards,
Kiran

Similar Messages

Payment Block Validation for User group

Dear SAP Validation Expert,
We like to allow only selected FI users to change Payment Block to ' ' (Free for Payment) in tcode: FB02, FB03 and FBL1N.
Curently we have managed to block other un-selected users from changing the Payemnt block to Free for Payment.
But our issues are Other fields also NOT able from changing/maintaining. For example in FB02, user NOT able to change Payment Block (BSEG-ZLSPR) from 'B' to ' ' (Free for Payment) which is expected but user also NOT able to maintain other field such as Payment term(BSEG-ZTERM), Baseline date (BSEG-ZFBDT), Assignment (BSEG-ZUONR) and Text Field(BSEG-SGTXT).
Below is our Validation, please advice how to improve it so that other fields can be changed too. Your swift reply is very much appreciated.
Pre-requisite:
( ( SYST-TCODE = 'FB02' ) OR
( SYST-TCODE = 'FBL1N' ) OR
( SYST-TCODE = 'FB03' ) AND
( BSEG-ZLSPR = ' ' ) AND
SYST-UNAME <> 'HIS20083'
Check:
BSEG-ZLSPR <> ' '
Message: E: You have no authorization.

Hi,
In your Validation small change has to be done.
Pre-requisite:
SYST-TCODE = 'FB02' ) OR ( SYST-TCODE = 'FBL1N' ) OR ( SYST-TCODE = 'FB03' )
Check:
SYST-UNAME 'HIS20083' AND BSEG-ZLSPR = ' '
Message: E: You have no authorization.
Try in the above procedure.
Thanks
Goutam

Multi block validation in a form using nested tables

Hi,
I have a tables that contains 3 nested tables plus some other varchar2 columns.
I have created a form with 4 blocks, three of them based on views on the 3 nested tables, the forth containing the other columns from the table.
I have created relationships between the 4th block and each of the first three.
The records in the nested tables (multi record blocks) depend on some values outside them (from the 4th block) and viceversa.
How can I perform the validation?
Thanks,
Leontin

I always use child tables rather than nested tables so this might not be applicable, but I like to use a constraint on a materialzed view when I have to validate multiple records or complicated relationships between blocks.
This example is for inserting ranges on separate records and ensuring the start and end values match up:
Re: need some help

SpamCannibal blocking valid domains.... How do I disable it?

Hello all,
I have been running fine for a few months, and I recently started getting bounce problems stemming from SpamCannibal. I found that when I send email to my mail server from an external account, i get a bounce message on my external account that states that SpamCannibal is blocking this email because my external accounts mail server is a spam server. It isn't, but that's neither here nor there.
After doing some research I have found that many many people have stopped using SpamCannibal due to their higher standards, and I found a few documents on how to disable it in a standard Linux install of SpamAssassin. However, the info isn't valid with regards to a standard Leopard Server install of SpamAssassin as the file exim.conf that is referred to in the other documents does not appear to exist in a Leopard Server environment.
Any suggestions?

the IP and domain are accurate. I talked to the host, and of course they are blaming my servers. I am on a T1, so I don't think that there is another server trying to block email.
Alex, I trust you enough to know that if you say SpamCannibal isn't installed, then SpamCannibal isn't installed.
The message looks like my server is kicking it back, but I wonder if it is something that the host is using to keep their users from using their servers as spam servers. But I am watching my firewall when I test this, and I am not seeing the message come through. Anyways, here is the bounce that I am recieving for what it is worth
When trying to deliver your message, the mail server at
gwa4.webcontrolcenter.xx encountered
problems with the following addresses:
For , Site (southsoundchristian.xx/70.102.95.26) said: 554 5.7.1 Service
unavailable; Client host [63.134.207.20] blocked using bl.spamcannibal.org;
blocked, See:
http://www.spamcannibal.org/cannibal.cgi?page=lookup&lookup=63.134.207.20
For a more detailed explanation see
http://netwinsite.com/surgemail/deliver_failed.htm

Why is firefox continually blocking valid websites and redirecting?

Firefox frequently (and annoyingly) blocks trusted sites from loading, sites like Sprint.com, for example. I know of no instance where they have blocked a malicious site and I find this practice annoying. How may I stop this from occurring?

It could be the work of one of your add-ons, or even add / mal-ware.
Look thru your add-ons list and make sure you know what each one is
there for. Also, check the programs that are on your computer
'''Windows > Start > Control Panel > Uninstall Programs.'''
'''(Mac: Open the "Applications" folder)'''
Go thru the list and use a web search to check any that you don't
know what they are.

ICloud is blocking valid emails

iCloud has started blocking a legitimate domain. How to I whitelist that domain?

Hello mshaty,
I found some information about troubleshooting false-positives in the iCloud junk mailbox:
Troubleshooting false-positives
Due to the complexity of accurately detecting and filtering out spam, on rare occasions a legitimate email from a friendly source may be blocked from reaching your Inbox. This is called a false-positive. If you feel that a legitimate email message was inadvertently filtered, you may want to ask your friend to send a follow up email to verify the issue exists before contacting support. If you notice that multiple email messages are being delayed, bounced, or not delivered, please contact iCloud Support directly.
Also make sure to check your Junk folder for email messages that were incorrectly marked as spam. To check your Junk folder from iCloud.com, choose the Mail application and click the Junk folder in the sidebar.
Note: Email messages in the Junk folder are automatically deleted after 30 days.
You can find the full article here:
iCloud: Identifying and filtering spam
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4899
Thank you for using Apple Support Communities.
Best,
Sheila M.

Logical block corruption in an unused block which is a part of index

Hi All,
During RMAN backup level 0 I am getting a corrupted block my DB:
RMAN-00571: ===========================================================
RMAN-00569: =============== ERROR MESSAGE STACK FOLLOWS ===============
RMAN-00571: ===========================================================
RMAN-03009: failure of backup command on t20 channel at 07/22/2009 21:30:49
ORA-19566: exceeded limit of 0 corrupt blocks for file /oracle/oradata/DB2/plind05_02.dbf
SQL> select * from v$database_block_corruption;
FILE# BLOCK# BLOCKS CORRUPTION_CHANGE# CORRUPTIO
2950 1879477 1 1.0124E+13 LOGICAL
SQL> SELECT tablespace_name, partition_name,segment_type, owner, segment_name FROM dba_extents WHERE file_id = 2950 and 1879477 between block_id AND block_id + blocks - 1;
no rows selected
So this block does not belong to any object.
SQL > select * from dba_free_space where file_id= 2950 and 1879477 between block_id and block_id blocks -1;+
TABLESPACE_NAME FILE_ID BLOCK_ID BYTES BLOCKS RELATIVE_FNO
USAGIDX_200907 2950 1879433 1048576 128 909
But it exists in dba_free_space so it belongs to file space usage bitmap.
DB Verify shows:
myserver:/oracle/rman/DB2:DBINST1> dbv file=/oracle/oradata/DB2/plind05_02.dbf BLOCKSIZE=8192
DBVERIFY: Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Production on Wed Jul 29 13:47:38 2009
Copyright (c) 1982, 2007, Oracle. All rights reserved.
DBVERIFY - Verification starting : FILE = /oracle/oradata/DB2/plind05_02.dbf
Block Checking: DBA = -480465494, Block Type = KTB-managed data block
**** row 2: key out of order
---- end index block validation
Page 1879477 failed with check code 6401
DBVERIFY - Verification complete
Total Pages Examined : 4194176
Total Pages Processed (Data) : 0
Total Pages Failing (Data) : 0
Total Pages Processed (Index): 3404935
Total Pages Failing (Index): 1
Total Pages Processed (Other): 569
Total Pages Processed (Seg) : 0
Total Pages Failing (Seg) : 0
Total Pages Empty : 788672
Total Pages Marked Corrupt : 0
Total Pages Influx : 0
Highest block SCN : 1795222745 (2360.1795222745)
Now, I have identified that this block belongs to an index subpartition so I have rebuild it with alter index ... rebuild subpartition... However, the RMAN backup still fails and DBV still reports an error.
I know that we could simply recreate the index but the problem is that its quite big (>6GB and table is >7TB).
My strong feeling is that the cause of this is that corrupted blocks will still be reported by RMAN and DBV until they are reused and reformatted.
My question is:
How can I reuse or reformat a block which does not belong to any object?

Hi,
Yes you're right, you need to reformat that block.
For that you need to allocate that block to a table, and fill that table with data until high water mark goes higher than block 1879477.
This isthe way I've done it once:
1) check the free space size below that block:
select sum(bytes)/1024/1024 before from dba_free_space where file_id=1879477 and block_id <= 1503738;
Let's say it is 6000 MB
2) create a dummy table, allocate enough extents to fill the size returned from the previous query
This does not format blocks, but the advantage of allocate extents is that you can specify size and datafile:
alter table allocate extents size 6000M datafile '/oracle/oradata/DB2/plind05_02.dbf';
you can check dba_extents to see if it covers block 1879477. If not, try to add a little more extents.
3) fill the table with data to fill those extents.
One idea is to insert one rows into the table, then use 'alter table test minimize records_per_block;' so that each block will have 2 rows maximum.
check the number of blocks (from dba_segments). Say you have 768000 blocks. Then you need to insert 768000/2 rows:
insert into ... select ... from dual connect by level < (768000/2)
4) check the high water mark has reach the end of all extents (compare dba_tables.blocks and dba_segemnts.blocks)
5) if not enough, try to add a little more rows.
Be careful that you don't go too far (especially if you have extensible datafile). Unfortunately, maxextents is ignored on LMT :(
6) now, your block should be reformatted. Just drop the dummy table.
Regards,
Franck.

How to "force" user to enter a valid value in a TextBox

How can one create a TextBox in which the user is not able to leave (commit the value, change focus, or perform the action of another control) unless a valid value (the value to be committed) is displayed?
The following is the best I've come up with so far.
Good: It doesn't permit a value to be committed unless it is valid.
Good: It doesn't permit the focus to be changed when TAB is pressed unless it is valid.
Bad: It permits the user to perform the action associated with a button at any time.
In the following code pressing on the button prints "I've been pushed", no matter the value of the TextBoxes. Can I stop this (in general, not for specific buttons)?
class ValidTextBox extends TextBox {
public-init var validValue:String = "";
function isValid():Boolean {
    return (rawText == validValue);
var isFocused = bind focused on replace {
    if (not focused and not isValid()) {
      requestFocus();
override function commit():Void {
    if (isValid()) { super.commit(); }
    else {};
var string1:String = "" on replace { println ("String1 = '{string1}'") };
var string2:String = "" on replace { println ("String2 = '{string2}'") };
def textbox1 = ValidTextBox { text: bind string1 with inverse; promptText: "String1: enter abc"; columns: 20; validValue: "abc"; }
def textbox2 = ValidTextBox { text: bind string2 with inverse; promptText: "String2: enter def"; columns: 20; validValue: "def"; }
def aButton = Button {
text: "Push me";
action: function():Void { println("I've been pushed!"); }
Stage {
scene: Scene {
    width: 250
    height: 300
    content: [ VBox { spacing: 10; content: [ textbox1, textbox2, aButton ] } ]
}

It sounds like you are looking for a concept of validation that groups items together. In days long gone Oracle used to have a product called Oracle Forms - that had field validation, record validation and block validation. So in your example if string1 and string2 were in the same persistable data object then the equivalent concept would be 'record validation'. The code in your button would say "if the record is valid print". A record is only valid if all its fields are valid.
JavaFX really provides a 'GUI toolkit'. I think you are looking for a fairly advanced binding framework - a framework that builds on the concept of field level validation. You can approximate such a thing by creating a 'validation group' class. This class would be able to have nodes added to it and have an 'isValid()' function which only returns true if all the node items are valid.

ORA-19566: exceeded limit of 0 corrupt blocks

Hi All,
We have been encountering some issues with RMAN backup; it has been erroring out with same errors (max corrupt blocks). As of now, I ran the db verify for affected files and found that indexes are failing. When I tried to find out the indexes from extent views, I was unable to find it. Looks like these blocks are in free space as I found it and also the V$backup corruption view shows the logical corruption.
Waiting for you suggestion....
BANNER
Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.3.0 - 64bi
PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.3.0 - Production
CORE 10.2.0.3.0 Production
TNS for HPUX: Version 10.2.0.3.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.3.0 - Production
RMAN LOG:
channel a3: starting piece 1 at 14-DEC-09
RMAN-03009: failure of backup command on a2 channel at 12/14/2009 05:43:42
ORA-19566: exceeded limit of 0 corrupt blocks for file /ub834/oradata/TERP/applsysd142.dbf
continuing other job steps, job failed will not be re-run
channel a2: starting incremental level 0 datafile backupset
channel a2: specifying datafile(s) in backupset
including current control file in backupset
channel a2: starting piece 1 at 14-DEC-09
channel a1: finished piece 1 at 14-DEC-09
piece handle=TERP_1769708180_level0_292_1_1_20091213065437.rmn tag=TAG20091213T065459 comment=API Version 2.0,MMS Version 5.0.0.0
channel a1: backup set complete, elapsed time: 01:14:45
channel a2: finished piece 1 at 14-DEC-09
piece handle=TERP_1769708180_level0_296_1_1_20091213065437.rmn tag=TAG20091213T065459 comment=API Version 2.0,MMS Version 5.0.0.0
channel a2: backup set complete, elapsed time: 00:24:54
RMAN-03009: failure of backup command on a4 channel at 12/14/2009 06:14:33
ORA-19566: exceeded limit of 0 corrupt blocks for file /ub834/oradata/TERP/applsysd143.dbf
continuing other job steps, job failed will not be re-run
released channel: a1
released channel: a2
released channel: a3
released channel: a4
RMAN-00571: ===========================================================
RMAN-00569: =============== ERROR MESSAGE STACK FOLLOWS ===============
RMAN-00571: ===========================================================
RMAN-03009: failure of backup command on a3 channel at 12/14/2009 06:41:00
ORA-19566: exceeded limit of 0 corrupt blocks for file /ub806/oradata/TERP/icxd01.dbf
Recovery Manager complete.
Thanks,
Vimlendu
Edited by: Vimlendu on Dec 20, 2009 10:27 AM

dbv file=/ora/oradata/binadb/RAT_TRANS_IDX01.dbf blocksize=8192
The result:
DBVERIFY: Release 10.2.0.3.0 - Production on Thu Nov 20 11:14:01 2003
(c) Copyright 2000 Oracle Corporation. All rights reserved.
DBVERIFY - Verification starting : FILE =
/ora/oradata/binadb/RAT_TRANS_IDX01.dbf
Block Checking: DBA = 75520968, Block Type = KTB-managed data block
**** row 80: key out of order
---- end index block validation
Page 23496 failed with check code 6401
DBVERIFY - Verification complete
Total Pages Examined : 34560
Total Pages Processed (Data) : 1
Total Pages Failing (Data) : 0
Total Pages Processed (Index): 31084
Total Pages Failing (Index): 1
Total Pages Processed (Other): 191
Total Pages Empty : 3284
Total Pages Marked Corrupt : 0
Total Pages Influx : 0
Seems like I have 1 page failing. I try to run this script:
select segment_type, segment_name, owner
from sys.dba_extents
where file_id = 18 and 23496 between block_id
and block_id + blocks - 1;
No rows returned.
Then, I try to run this script:
Select tablespace_name, file_id, block_id, bytes
from dba_free_space
where file_id = 18
and 23496 between block_id and block_id + blocks - 1
Resulting 1 row.
Seems like I have the possible corrupt block on unused space.
Edited by: Vimlendu on Dec 20, 2009 2:30 PM
Edited by: Vimlendu on Dec 20, 2009 2:41 PM

Block Corruption (BR0398E DBVERIFY detected corrupted blocks in /oracle/TS2

Hello Gurus
I am facing Data Block corruption error for single datafile....
BR0278W Command output of '/oracle/TS2/102_64/bin/dbv file=/oracle/TS2/sapdata3/ts2_73/ts2.data73 blocksize=8192':
DBVERIFY: Release 10.2.0.2.0 - Production on Thu Jul 17 23:31:25 2008
Copyright (c) 1982, 2005, Oracle. All rights reserved.
DBVERIFY - Verification starting : FILE = /oracle/TS2/sapdata3/ts2_73/ts2.data73
Block Checking: DBA = 528925394, Block Type = KTB-managed data block
row 4: key out of order
     end index block validation
Page 443090 failed with check code 6401
DBVERIFY - Verification complete
Total Pages Examined         : 1280000
Total Pages Processed (Data) : 248379
Total Pages Failing   (Data) : 0
Total Pages Processed (Index): 180541
Total Pages Failing   (Index): 1
Total Pages Processed (Other): 13272
Total Pages Processed (Seg) : 0
Total Pages Failing   (Seg) : 0
Total Pages Empty            : 837808
Total Pages Marked Corrupt   : 0
Total Pages Influx           : 0
Highest block SCN            : 65006255 (0.65006255)
BR0398E DBVERIFY detected corrupted blocks in /oracle/TS2/sapdata3/ts2_73/ts2.data73
appriciated help please..
Regards
Giridhar.

Dump file /oracle/TS2/saptrace/usertrace/ts2_ora_23103.trc
Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.2.0 - 64bit Production
With the Partitioning and Data Mining options
ORACLE_HOME = /oracle/TS2/102_64
System name:    SunOS
Node name:      sassad25
Release:        5.10
Version:        Generic_120011-14
Machine:        sun4u
Instance name: TS2
Redo thread mounted by this instance: 1
Oracle process number: 53
Unix process pid: 23103, image: oracle@sassad25 (TNS V1-V3)
2008-07-18 13:48:40.486
SERVICE NAME:(SYS$USERS) 2008-07-18 13:48:40.484
SESSION ID:(925.20292) 2008-07-18 13:48:40.484
Block Checking: DBA = 528925394, Block Type = KTB-managed data block
row 4: key out of order
end index block validation
for block 0x1f86c2d2
Block header dump: 0x1f86c2d2
Object id on Block? Y
seg/obj: 0x2c6f0 csc: 0x00.3f418d9 itc: 2 flg: E typ: 2 - INDEX
     brn: 0 bdba: 0x1f86c00b ver: 0x01 opc: 0
     inc: 0 exflg: 0
Itl           Xid                  Uba         Flag Lck        Scn/Fsc
0x01   0x0000.000.00000000 0x00000000.0000.00 -
    0 fsc 0x0000.00000000
0x02   0x0002.008.00002cb6 0x02475283.0359.19 --U-    2 fsc 0x0000.03f418ee
Leaf block dump
===============
header address 17494483044=0x412c0a064
kdxcolev 0
KDXCOLEV Flags = - - -
kdxcolok 0
kdxcoopc 0x80: opcode=0: iot flags=--- is converted=Y
kdxconco 7
kdxcosdc 0
kdxconro 174
kdxcofbo 384=0x180
kdxcofeo 967=0x3c7
kdxcoavs 583
kdxlespl 0
kdxlenxt 528925395=0x1f86c2d3
kdxleprv 528925393=0x1f86c2d1
kdxledsz 6
kdxlebksz 8032
row#0[7990] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=42, data:(6): 1b ce 75 c6 00 15
col 0; len 3; (3): 30 31 35
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 9; (9): 48 50 4c 4a 31 31 30 30 69
col 4; len 3; (3): 34 36 43
col 5; len 1; (1): 44
col 6; len 1; (1): 80
row#1[7952] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=38, data:(6): 1c 46 88 34 00 0e
col 0; len 3; (3): 30 31 35
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 5; (5): 48 50 4c 4a 34
col 4; len 3; (3): 34 36 43
col 5; len 1; (1): 44
col 6; len 1; (1): 80
row#2[7913] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=39, data:(6): 1b 8f 2b bd 00 03
col 0; len 3; (3): 30 31 35
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 6; (6): 48 50 4c 4a 34 30
col 4; len 3; (3): 34 36 43
col 5; len 1; (1): 44
col 6; len 1; (1): 80
row#3[7871] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=42, data:(6): 20 03 18 b1 00 0a
col 0; len 3; (3): 30 31 35
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 9; (9): 48 50 4c 4a 34 30 30 30 00
col 4; len 3; (3): 34 36 43
col 5; len 1; (1): 44
col 6; len 1; (1): 80
row#4[7830] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=41, data:(6): 1b 4f 19 ef 00 0b
col 0; len 3; (3): 30 31 35
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 8; (8): 48 50 4c 4a 34 30 30 30
col 4; len 3; (3): 34 36 43
col 5; len 1; (1): 44
col 6; len 1; (1): 80
row#5[7788] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=42, data:(6): 21 03 15 12 00 02
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 9; (9): 48 50 4c 4a 34 30 30 30 31
col 4; len 3; (3): 34 36 43
col 5; len 1; (1): 44
col 6; len 1; (1): 80
row#6[7746] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=42, data:(6): 1c 86 83 6a 00 0c
col 0; len 3; (3): 30 31 35
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 9; (9): 48 50 4c 4a 34 30 30 30 37
col 4; len 3; (3): 34 36 43
col 5; len 1; (1): 44
col 6; len 1; (1): 80
row#7[7704] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=42, data:(6): 1b 4f 19 0f 00 02
col 0; len 3; (3): 30 31 35
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 9; (9): 48 50 4c 4a 34 30 30 30 44
col 4; len 3; (3): 34 36 43
col 5; len 1; (1): 44
col 6; len 1; (1): 80
row#8[7662] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=42, data:(6): 1f 03 50 f5 00 03
col 0; len 3; (3): 30 31 35
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 9; (9): 48 50 4c 4a 34 30 30 30 44
col 4; len 3; (3): 37 30 30
col 5; len 1; (1): 44
col 6; len 1; (1): 80
row#9[7619] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=43, data:(6): 1f 03 50 f5 00 04
col 0; len 3; (3): 30 31 35
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 9; (9): 48 50 4c 4a 34 30 30 30 44
col 4; len 3; (3): 37 30 30
col 5; len 1; (1): 44
col 6; len 2; (2): c1 02
row#10[7577] flag: -
, lock: 0, len=42, data:(6): 1f 43 21 d1 00 09
col 0; len 3; (3): 30 31 35
col 1; len 2; (2): 58 58
col 2; len 8; (8): 46 4f 4e 54 52 45 50 4c
col 3; len 9; (9): 48 50 4c 4a 34 30 30 30 45
col 4; len 3; (3): 34 36 43
col 5; len 1; (1): 44

Invoice Block - PP Question

Guys
I have set PP block as 10% or 250 EURO for our invoices. It seems like this is applied per invoice and not per PO -
example: PO created for 300 items @ 100 Euro each
I can do GR for 300 and then post 4 invoices (or more) and go 400 euro over the total PO amount - is it possible to make the PP block valid per PO and not per invoice?
Appreciate your help
thanks!

CFF & MA
I am having a very similar situation. I know its been several years, but do you recall your solution?

IPS 4240 Blocking Questions with Pix 515E

I have enabled Blocking on the 4240 and have set the Blocking Device as our Pix 515E. When I look at the Signature Configurations quite a few Signature Actions are set to Produce Alert only. If blocking is enabled do you have to also go and set the Signature Actions to Deny or TCP Reset? So far my IPS dosen't show any Denied Attackers and it has detected High level Traffic which I would assume should now be blocked. Thanks John

Yes, you have to go under the signatures you want and enable blocking for them as an action. Configuring blocking globally (defining the blocking device, the interface,, the login details for the device, etc), doesn't actually enable any blocking on the sensor per se, you still have to go and enable blocking for that particular signature. when that particular sig fires in future, the sensor will block it on the device you have configured.
Be very careful with blocking, the reason we don't simply block all signatures is that it would be very dangerous to blindly add access-lists to a device that will stop traffic. You first need to make sure you're not getting any false-positives on the signatures and end up blocking valid traffic. Also, on a busy sensor you could easily overrun both the sensor and the blocking device with writing and removing 1000's of access-lists onto it. And finally, although not likely, blocking can even be used as a denial of service attack, where an attacker, if they know what signatures you are blocking on, can spoof packets past your sensor so that it will deny traffic to legitimate hosts.
You need to look at what signatures you really want to block on, then enable blocking on them individually.

DBV reports index blocks failing... rows locked by itl

Hi all,
from two nights RMAN backup on a database (8.1.7.4) is failing due to corrupted blocks. I've run dbv and I've found this situation:
Block Checking: DBA = 272791174, Block Type = KTB-managed data block
**** actual rows locked by itl 2 = 1 != # in trans. header = 0
**** actual free space credit for itl 2 = 26 != # in trans. hdr = 0
**** actual free space = 4434 < kdxcoavs = 4460
---- end index block validation
Page 161414 failed with check code 6401
Block Checking: DBA = 272791728, Block Type = KTB-managed data block
**** actual rows locked by itl 2 = 126 != # in trans. header = 125
---- end index block validation
Page 161968 failed with check code 6401
Block Checking: DBA = 272791736, Block Type = KTB-managed data block
**** actual rows locked by itl 2 = 167 != # in trans. header = 166
---- end index block validation
Page 161976 failed with check code 6401
Block Checking: DBA = 272793483, Block Type = KTB-managed data block
**** actual rows locked by itl 2 = 273 != # in trans. header = 272
---- end index block validation
Page 163723 failed with check code 6401
Block Checking: DBA = 272793485, Block Type = KTB-managed data block
**** actual rows locked by itl 2 = 257 != # in trans. header = 256
---- end index block validation
Page 163725 failed with check code 6401
Block Checking: DBA = 272793496, Block Type = KTB-managed data block
**** actual rows locked by itl 2 = 267 != # in trans. header = 266
---- end index block validation
I've tried to drop and restore/recover tablespace without success. Any hints about this issue? I've looked in metalink for suggestions without success...
Thanks Steve

Can you do a /dev/null export to identify the corrupted segment?
If you find any corrputed segment, check this metalink note: 28814.1 - Handling Oracle Block Corruptions in Oracle7/8/8i/9i/10g

How to prevent a user from entering characters into a number field

How do you prevent a user from entering characters like A or B into a field that is defined as a numeric field?
Please note that
- we use block validation (for other reasons)
- we are not able to convert these numeric fields to character fields
We want to avoid a user being hasseled with the FRM-40209 ... message.
This message is
- not very helpfull because it does not inform us what the problem field is
- not suppressable
Any hints ?

I went back to the drawing board on this one.
You are absolutely right : the message can be catched !
By writing an on-error trigger you can check for the error number. Sadly enough my first attempt on this used the on-message trigger which never fired hence my desperation.
Anyway, the on-error trigger in combination with :SYSTEM.CURRENT_ITEM or :SYSTEM.TRIGGER_ITEM enables me to display a more meaningfull message to my users.
Thanks for the hint.

Performance issue and Error in ICM in case of a lot of messages

I am run performance testing for the following scenario.
csv files with ~1000 lines -> XML -> BPM - 1:N mapping - for each block- validation mapping - swith (choise JDBC or files System) send message.
My BPM has beed working for <b>2 hour</b>
The most messages are sent correnctly but
for some messages I see
<SAP:Code area="INTERNAL">CLIENT_RECEIVE_FAILED</SAP:Code>
<SAP:P1>405</SAP:P1>
<SAP:P2>ICM_HTTP_INTERNAL_ERROR</SAP:P2>
Message content is not big
for some
<SAP:AdditionalText>if_http_client receive http_communication_failure</SAP:AdditionalText>
<SAP:ApplicationFaultMessage namespace="" />
<SAP:Stack>An error occurred when refreshing the XI runtime cache</SAP:Stack>
Could you help me why this errors appear?
Message was edited by: Denis Ivanov

Hi Dennis,
you have a problem with a http destination, may be not enough work processes. If you execute the test again, plz have a look
- to SM50: Are there enough dialog processes)
- to ST06 /detail analysis: Enough CPU power and enough memory?
- to ST22: Any short dumps?
- to SM21: Any critical system informations?
- to SMQ1/SMQ2: How many message are queued? How many errors?
- to SM37: Has Job with program RSQIWKEX restarted failed messages?
- SXMB_MONI: Are the failed messages restartable?
2 hours is defintivskaja to long. BPM is a performance bottleneck, espially if you have loops.
Regards,
Udo

Blocking validation

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for