CUP - Initiator for roles not requiring approval (i.e. auto provisioned)

We recently upgraded to GRC 5.3, SP10 and started noticing that using CUP, for roles that should be automatically provisioned (i.e. no approval required), it is taking between 3 minutes 45 seconds to 5 minutes for the request to be successfully submitted and automatically approved with provisioning. I was wondering if anyone is experiencing simlar system performance
Our set-up for auto provisioned role requests is as follows:
1. Created initiator INI_NO_APPROVE using role for attribute
2. Created stage STG_NO_STAGE with Approver Determinator = No Stage
3. Created path definition PATH_NO_APPROVE with number of stages =2 and initiator = INI_NO_APPROVE
Thanks!

F.Y.I.
As per SAP's recommendation - we applied note:1423983 in all target provisioningn systems and this resolved the issue.

Similar Messages

Are there any apps which will allow local calling using data only that do not require any special numbers called out initially and does not require the receiver to have a similar app or account?

Are there any apps which will allow local calling using data only (not minutes, no extra charge) that do not require any special numbers called out initially and does not require the receiver to have a similar app or account? Just for random local calling.

Yup.
Here is a way you could solve this by adding an extra column and a small lookup table:
The lookup table is here for the copying:
0
1
k
kilo
2
M
mega
3
G
giga
4
T
tera
5
P
peta
6
E
exa
7
Z
zetta
8
Y
yotta
In table 8 (the one on the left in the image) column A is where the values are.
B1=A1÷(1024^VLOOKUP(INT(LOG(A1, 1024)), Binary Prefixes::A:D, 1))&" "&VLOOKUP(INT(LOG(A1, 1024)), Binary Prefixes::A:D, 2)&"B"
this is shorthand for... select cell B1, then type (or copy and paste from here) the formula:
=A1÷(1024^VLOOKUP(INT(LOG(A1, 1024)), Binary Prefixes::A:D, 1))&" "&VLOOKUP(INT(LOG(A1, 1024)), Binary Prefixes::A:D, 2)&"B"
select cell B1, copy,
now select all the cells in column B, paste

GRAC AC 10 CUP E-Mail Notification for Role Owner to approve

Hello Experts ,
I have my CUP working in such a way that role owners are able to go to their Inbox in UI>My Home . However I would like to send E-mail into their Inbox . Right now we are getting the e-mail only at the end of the request when the request is completed.
What should be configured in MSMP ? Following notification events defined for Process ID Access Request Approval Workflow
Notification Event : END_OF_REQUEST Template ID : GRAC_AR_SUBMIT Recipient ID: Requestor
For the stage Config ID GRAC_ROLEOWNER notification settings are :
Not .Event : NEW_WORK_ITEM Template ID : GRAC_AR_NEW_WORK_ITEM Recipient ID : Current Approvers .
What else do I have to do .
Reg,
Anthony

Hi,
You will need to make sure that the submission and new work item notifications are activated in MSMP at the various stages and also make sure that the approvers are marked for both approval and notification at the agent assignments.
I would also check to make sure that their emaill addresses are maintained correctly in the GRC system (the data sources will not pick up the approver email addresses automatically).
Cheers, Simon
Edited by: Simon Persin on Jan 25, 2012 6:27 PM

Test Scenerio for Delivery Note Required Please

Hi
There used to be on the portal some sample test scenerios docs .
I cannot seem to locate them and need to check with the user a delivery note process.
PLease advise
Thanks

Hi Guys
I was looking for the Test Plans which I have used before as I wanted to record some results,
I have found them now so no worries, they were under the Implementation section.
Thanks for yur help
D

Access for Confirmation not required

Hi Friends,
I want to disable the confirmation Tab from Requisitioners screen.
Basically I do not want to end user to do confirmation from SRM end.
How can I do this? Is there any Badi or role authorization solve this purpose?
Any Idea?
Regards,
Navneet

Hello,
this is role based (TCode PFCG)
You must remove menu entry "Confirm Goods / Services" and from authorization > Transaction Code Check at Transaction Start> remove BBPCF02.
Gordan

Role created in ERM is not appearing in CUP request for assignment-GRC 10.0

Hi,
We are on GRC 10.0 - SP5
We have created a role in ERM and it was succesfully created in backend system. However when we tried to assign the same role using CUP request - the role is not appearing.
1) Do we need to upload roles for CUP in GRC 10.0 (similar to 5.3) to populate. Will the role doesnot automatically appears in GRC database for CUP as it is created through ERM?
2) If the roles are imported in ERM with role owner information, does the same reflects for CUP also for role owner approver assignments?
Thanks and Best Regards,
Srihari.K

Hi Sri,
Is the role status set to "production" ??
Cheers,
Diego.

Approver for the application role not working out

Hi,
I have created a role with type application and Approver A, then created a business role with the Approver B and included application role into the business role.
When i assign this business role to a user the only request for approval goes to Approver B and after approval the both application and business roles are assigned. Strangely it seem to skip the Approver A. I did even remove the approver in business role, leaving only approver in application role, still same result - it skips Approver A.
I'm using IDM 8.0.0.1, any ideas why it would skip the approver in the included role?
Thanks!

Thanks for the quick reply. I've tried optional with approval and here is what I found.
It seems I need a combination of the two. My end goal is to have a second level approval, one group would be responsible for approving the business role and the system owners would be responsible for approving the nested application roles. When a user requests the business role, they must have approvals for the business role and all of the nested application roles for their request to be completed.
If the app. roles are required, the workflow automatically incorporate the nested appl. roles in the request but does not require approval for them. If they are conditional with approval, the user would have to submit a second request to get all of the nested application roles. It looks like I need a combination of the two, required with approval.
I need it to behave like it does when you have a role with approver that includes resources with an approver. The role and resources must all be approved before the request can be completed successfully.
I'm trying to see if this is possible through the GUI before I customize the workflow.

CUP 5.3: Mass approver update for roles

Hello all,
Is there any way to do mass approvers update for roles in CUP? For instance mass change ApproverA to ApproverB for all roles. Or add ApproberC to all roles in process "Basis"?
Thanks, Anton.

That's actually quite easy to do:
- go to roles / serach
- do an empty search
- export
- open the excel file and do a search/replace on the approver
- save the excel file
- upload the excel file with overwrite option turned on
Done.
Frank.

Invoice Approval not required for certain cost centres

Hi - Can anyone advise how to setup in R12 so that AP Invoices for certain Cost Centers do not require approval in Payables Invoice Approval, Approvals Management?
Thanks

In PTARQ --> Customizing --> ESS > Service Specific Settings > Working Time > Leave Request > Processing Processes > Specify Processing Processes for Types of Leave, for each combination of rule group, PS grouping and absence type where approval is not required, untick the "Requests have to be approved" flag.
I haven't tried this as we haven't had the need, but I assume it will work.

Bind Variable : required - no message, not required - error

hi
Please consider the example application created using JDeveloper 11.1.1.6.0
at http://www.consideringred.com/files/oracle/2012/RequiredOrNotBVarApp-v0.01.zip
It has these View Objects defined
- EmployeesReqNoValueBVarVO which has a required Bind Variable, and where clause "last_name like '%' || :LastNameBVar || '%'"
- EmployeesNotReqNoValueBVarVO which has a NOT required Bind Variable, and where clause "(:LastNameBVar is null or last_name like '%' || :LastNameBVar || '%')"
The Bind Variable in both View Objects does NOT have a value (no default value, not programmatically set, not entered by the user, ...).
This "no value set" aspect could be the result of a "development error", but the resulting observed behaviour is at least "peculiar".
- scenario (sc1) : run "try tryEmployeesReqNoValueBVarVO", see a table filled with rows and NO message about the required Bind Variable
- scenario (sc2) : run "try tryEmployeesNotReqNoValueBVarVO", see "No data to display." in the table and the "Missing IN or OUT parameter at index:: 1" error for the NOT required Bind Variable for a where clause that can deal with null values
- question (q1) How can be explained that scenario (sc1) does not result in an error message about the required Bind Variable (and scenario (sc2) does result in an error message about the NOT required Bind Variable)?
- question (q2) What does the "Required" checkbox for a Bind Variable really mean for Bind Variables used in a where clause of a View Object?
If the described behaviour can be reproduced (using RequiredOrNotBVarApp-v0.01.zip), confirmations are welcome.
(Aspects of these scenario's could be related to forum thread "Bind variable required/not required: strange behaviour".)
many thanks
Jan Vervecken

Thanks for your reply Frank.
Frank Nimphius wrote:
... your query actually is dependent on the existence of the bind variable because the bind variable is used in the where clause part. ...Sure, and the Bind Variable does exist (in both (sc1) and (sc2)).
... This has nothing to do with whether the bind variable value is checked for NULL and if the value it contains is NULL performs an "all you can eat" type of query. Because the existing, NOT required Bind Variable has not been given a value in scenario (sc2), the check for NULL only makes more explicit that NULL is a valid value for the SQL statement.
... Non required bind variables are used in the context of view criteria to avoid missing IN or OUT parameters. ...The "Required" checkbox for a Bind Variable is also available/enabled when the Bind Variable is not used in a View Criteria (in both (sc1) and (sc2)).
... In the case of a view criteria, the VO query may be executed without the view criteria applied and for this reason should not fail only because the defined bind variable is not provided. ...No View Criteria in the scenario's (sc1) and (sc2) I descirbe.
... If you run the query in the tester, you get
(java.sql.SQLException) Missing IN or OUT parameter at index:: 1
and no query is executed at all for EmployeesNotReqNoValueBVarVOSure, that matches scenario (sc2), but the Bind Variable can be configured as NOT required, how can it be missing?
The JDeveloper help page "Create or Edit Bind Variables Dialog - Variable Page" says:
"... Alternatively, you can use the SQL Statement page of the Edit View Objects dialog to enter a parameterized WHERE clause. Note that the bind variables you enter in a parameterized SQL WHERE clause will require a valid value at runtime or a runtime exception error will be thrown. ..."
So, null as a valid value, seems to explain the behaviour in scenario (sc1).
"... In contrast, when you create a view criteria filter condition that references a named bind variable, you can specify whether the value is required or optional. ..."
But, the "Required" checkbox is also available (to uncheck) for Bind Variables that are not used in a View Criteria.
Specifically for the "Required" checkbox the help page says : "... Select if you want to make the value of a name bind variable required for any usage the references the named bind variable. For example, when the value is required (default), all view criteria items that reference the named bind variable will fail to execute unless a valid value is supplied at runtime. Alternatively, you can leave the value not required and use the Create View Criteria dialog to specify whether or not individual view criteria items require the value. ..."
Again, the focus is on View Criteria, although it can also be unchecked (configuring as NOT Required) for Bind Variables that are not used in a View Criteria (which does not seem to be something you should do).
But, still, there is a perspective here that makes this possibly very confusing:
- a View Object where clause with a required Bind Variable, no value set --> results in rows, and NO message about a missing value
- a View Object where clause with a NOT required Bind Variable, no value set --> results in no rows, and a message about a missing value
regards
Jan

Approval work flow for Role based and Resource based

Hi All,
We have to implement approval work flow for the following things in OIM 9.1.0.1
Approval work flow for Functional Roles (Groups in OIM) (Approvalsrequired for users to get these roles)
IT Roles (Resources in OIM) (Approvalsrequired for users to get these resource)
Functional Role (Group) contains policy1,polici2. Polciy1 contains res1,res2 and Policy2 contain res3,res4.I want to create approval work flow for this Functional Role to achieve the following
User raise a request for the functional role, then it should wait to get manager approval. then once its gets approval, that user account should create on all resources which are involved in that group.
And, I have to define approoval work flow for all individual resources to get users account creation on target with approvals. These resources may include in the groups as well.
After getting approval for functional role (Group), then Will OIM starts the approval flow for all resources involved in the group? becase, all resources have approval workflow at resource level also.
My Goal: Approval work flow for Group, should not process the approval work flow for resource. can we do it in OIM 9.1.0.1?
And can we do the same in OIM 11g also?
Please help me and do let me know, if you need any information from my end.
Thanks.

Thats configurable buddy ! ! And possible in 10G and 11G both versions.
Functional Roles : These are the groups/roles in OIM 10g/11g with access policies attached at the backend.
- Create a dummy resource and name it Request Role or anything as you like. Attach an Object Form to it and have form field for Role Name, this would be a lookup type field linked to all OIM groups (leave system values using lookup query). So a user can select any OIM Group in this request as per configuration. Have approval workflows defined on this dummy resource Request Role and in its Provisioning Process make user/s a part of the requested group.
- Now once the user is made a part of the group, the associated access policy would be invoked automatically and thereby provisioning. The only thing you need to keep in mind is that create the access policy without approval (there is a check box). If you do this the approvals would never be invoked even if you assign a group manually to the user coz it suppresses all the approvals in this access policy.
IT Roles : These would be linked to the resource and you can define individual approvals on the resources as required.These approvals would be required if someone raises a request for these resources individually.
Thanks
Sunny

The workflow could not update the item, possibly because one or more columns for the item require a different type of information. Outcome: Unknown Error

Received this error (The workflow could not update the item, possibly because one or more columns for the item require a different type of information.) recently on a workflow that was
working fine and no changes were made to the workflow.
I have tried a few suggestions, i.e. adding a pause before any ‘Update’ action (which didn’t help because the workflow past this action without incident); checked the data type being written
to the fields (the correct data types are being written); and we even checked the list schema to ensure the list names and the internal names are aligned (they
are), but we still cannot figure out why the workflow is still throwing this error.
We located the area within the workflow step where it is failing and we inserted a logging action to determine if the workflow would execute the logging action but it did not, but wrote the same error message.
The workflow is a Reusable Approval workflow designed in SharePoint Designer 2010 and attached to a content type.
The form associated with the list was modified in InfoPath 2010.
Approvers would provide their approval in the InfoPath form which is then read by the workflow.
Side note - items created after the workflow throws this Unknown Error some seem to be working fine.
We have deleted the item in question and re-added it with no effect.
Based on what we were able to determine there don’t seem to be any consistency with how this issue is behaving.
Any suggestions on how to further investigate this issue in order to find the root cause would be greatly appreciated?
Cheers

Hi,
I understand that the reusable workflow doesn’t work properly now. Have you tried to remove the Update list item action to see whether the workflow can run without issue?
If the workflow runs perfectly when the Update list item action is removed, then you need to check whether there are errors in the update action. Check whether the values have been changed.
Thanks,
Entan Ming
Entan Ming
TechNet Community Support

Import invoice with status as Approval not Required

Hi All,
Can any one give the way to import an invoice with payables open interface import status as Approval not required.
Thank you in advance.
Raj.

midimidi,
> So to be clear...if the AS is on the main timeline,
import statements
> are not needed, and if the AS is external and imported,
import
> statements are needed.
That's a general rule of thumb, but not 100% applicable.
> Are there any other exceptions to that, or does that go
for all AS3
> classes?
There are exceptions, and the easiest way to find them is to
leave out
your import statements and plug away ... sooner or later,
you'll get a
compiler error, and then you'll know. :)
>> It did strike me *** odd though, an imported .as
file uses the same
>> publish settings as code on the timeline. So why
treat them differently?
FLA files have publish settings, but AS files don't. They're
just text
files. I hear what you're saying ... they end up getting
compiled along
with / into the some FLA anyway -- and that FLA does have
classpaths
listed -- but those same AS files might be compiled in Flex
Builder 2 or
some 3rd party compiler. It would probably make good sense to
require the
import statement for inline FLA code, but not everyone is a
hardcore
programmer, and Adobe knows it. Nothing is *hurt* by using
import in FLAs,
but for folks who just want to do light programming, the
convenience of not
having to use it is nice.
David Stiller
Adobe Community Expert
Dev blog,
http://www.quip.net/blog/
"Luck is the residue of good design."

Is Distributed Transaction Coordinator services of the application role are required by SQL Server 2012 for clustering and support of SharePoint 2013.

All I want to know is if Distributed Transaction Coordinator services of the application role are required by SQL Server 2012 for clustering and support of SharePoint 2013.
I have been planning and deploying my companies first Windows Server 2012/SQL Server 2012 Always On cluster and Always On Availability Groups Multi-Subnet cluster and instances for SharePoint 2013, and I will be brutally honest, the documentation on either
the MSDN and TechNet leave alot to be desired. Continually finding links in the documentation will take me from a Windows 2012 reference to a page talking about Windows Server 2008 or R2, The differences of which there are so many when it comes to configurations,
settings, roles, services when working with SQL Server 2012. I have been confused, frustrated, screaming mad, with all the misdirection in this documentation. The documentation takes me windows 2008 R2 which is different than 2012!
Tired and trying to pick myself up off the floor!
Greg
Gman

In general, DTC is not required for SQL 2012. But, since you are asking specifically about SharePoint, it would be better to ask in a SharePoint forum. They would be more likely to know those situations where FTC might be needed by SharePoint.
.:|:.:|:. tim

One CUP request for assigning role to multiple users

Hi,
We assign roles to users in production only through CUP requests.. We use GRC 5.3
Here we have a case where we need to assign one role to 60 users in production(each user may have different roles assigned in the back end) . I can raise one CUP request for all users using " multi-user" option in Copy request . But when we want to make a risk analysis , it will not show risks at user level as each user had different roles and may get different risks by adding new role.
Instead it will give risks if any for only that new role which want to assign. Our manager is not accepting as this is not giving complete picture of risks for each user when we add new role.
Please suggest me if there is any other way where I can make a risk analysis for each user when I created a CUP request for multiple users.
Or the only solution is to create 60 CUP requests ?? this would be too manual
Regards ,
jaags

Raghu,
thanks for the reply, you are right as per the audit .But suppose if it is for 200 users ,creating 200 CUP requests will be impractical right.
there should be some solution for this , because there will be many situations practically where we have to assign roles to N number of users.
Is this possible in GRC 10 ? any idea ?
Regards,
Jaags

CUP - Initiator for roles not requiring approval (i.e. auto provisioned)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for