Conflicts in DOE when the object does not exist in CDS.

Question

Hi all.
SCENARIO:
I have implemented a SWCV with only a DO ( backend triggered). It has a Node structure with only one child structure.
My DO has three function:
- GETLIST:  return a table with objects from R3  identified by WCRN.
- GETDETAIL: For each register from getlist, return a list of child registers with state : IMP or SEÑ.
                    This state in R3 may be IMP, SEÑ o NORM (but in devices, only I want them in state IMP o SEÑ)
- MODIFY: modify the state for a child register.
EXAMPLE:
For example, I create a parent object in R3 with 3 children registers with state IMP. This parent register with his three children registers are upload to CDS.  When I syncronize, I obtain them in my device.
PROBLEM:
The problem starts when I modify the state to NORM of any child register in R3.  Then, in DOE, this child register is deleted in CDS becouse as I have said before, the function GETDETAIL only returns registers in state IMPS o SEÑ. Automatically the queue
of my device is update too. Before syncronize my device, I change the state to SEÑ of the tree children registers in PDA. Then when I syncronize, the process tries to update then in CDS but one of this child register does not exist in DOE so I obtain the error text below in DOE:
Mesage: "Cannot update/delete object that does not exist in the CDS; node 'ZMOB_DESC_ETIQUETA' "
Service Name:  KEYMAP_SERVICE_BV  And in my Device, the child which generated the conflict does not exist (this is oK) but I continue having the others two children registers with the same state that I modified before syncronizing (SEÑ) while in R3 those two states are IMP.
I have tested to modify the 3 posibilities of conflict detection scheme of the DO but the problem continues.
I would like to know if there is any posibility or configuration to obtain the next scenario:  when this conflict will occurs, GETDETAIL will run and depending on which source will have preference:
1- DEVICE PREFERENCE - the state from children registers in R3 will be updated to SEÑ.
2 - R3 PREFERENCE - the state from my children registers in the device will be the same as in R3 (IMP).
but never never never  never will happens like now ( differente state in R3 and PDA after syncronizing)
Best regards
Edited by: Maria Elena Fernandez on Feb 10, 2010 12:52 PM

Answer 1

Hi again Oliver.
Are you sure that ROW-LEVEL Conflict handling should detect the row with conflict and download the others two child register trought GETDAIL?
I've just checked it again but it continues without working. After the conflict, none child is downloaded to my device.
According to your two opcions:
1- Imposible to avoid that.  It's a customer's requirement that they can modify states by R3 and Devices.
2- Imposible too becouse we've already implemented the swcv in a production scenario. The application is already running and to change the model suppose a long time.
I explain you the scenario again with an graphical example:
INIITIAL STATE:  ( Device)
parent structure :  ID1(key), date,                                 
child structure:        ID1, 1, IMP (status)                                 
                                        ID1, 2, IMP (status)                                
                                        ID1, 3, IMP (status)                                 
INITIAL STATE ( R3).
ID1(key), date, ....
  -  ID1, 1, IMP(status)
  -  ID1, 2, IMP(status)
  -  ID1, 3, IMP (status)
After this, I modified in R3->   ID1, 1, IMP  to  ID1, 1, NOR
Then, GETDETAIL starts and deletes that register in DOE.
Now I change the 3 children register in Device
  ID1, 1, IMP     -->  ID1, 1, SEÑ                                       
  ID1, 2, IMP     -->  ID1, 2, SEÑ                                   
  ID1, 3, IMP     -->   ID1, 3, SEÑ          
After I syncronice,  FINAL STATE ( Device)
parent structure :  ID1(key), date, ....                             
     child strucuture:                                                                               
- ID1, 2, SEÑ (status)                             
                                 - ID1, 3, SEÑ (status)            
FINAL STATE ( R3)
   ID1(key), date, ....
        -  ID1, 1, NORM(status)
        -  ID1, 2, IMP(status)
        -  ID1, 3, IMP (status)
And that is the problem, different states between R3 and device.   I should need that the state in device for the others two children will be also IMP if R3 has preference or the two children will be SEÑ in R3 if the device has preference. But Now neither children in R3 nor children in Device are updated . Only the first which generate the conflict is deleted from device ( normal because it was still in the queue from the device before syncronice.
Best regards.
Edited by: Maria Elena Fernandez on Feb 11, 2010 8:32 AM
Edited by: Maria Elena Fernandez on Feb 11, 2010 8:43 AM