Is FI_DOCUMNT guaranteed to be safe?

It's well known that archiving object FI_DOCUMNT will not deleted any open document.
Does this mean that we do not have to worry about wrongful deletion?
Thanks a lot!

Let's think about a scenario like this:
Archiving object A has to be archived before archiving object B.
If this sequence is NOT followed by me:
1) Whether SAP will stop the job for archiving object B and insist that A has to be archived first;
2) If SAP does not stop me so the sequence is not followed, how serious would be the consequence and how to remedy it (DB recovery is excluded).
I really appreciate your patience.
Best regards.

Similar Messages

Nomad Jukebox Zen Xtra -- Intrinsically Safe

Is this mp3 player intrinsically safe? So far I've been reading over all the information I can find on it, but I haven't found this specifically. Anyone else found anything about this?
For example is it alright to use this when you're around chemical gasses -- Like when you're supposed to turn a cell phone off when pumping gas because it isn't "intrinsically safe"; does this mp3 follow the same rules?Message Edited by elfiemae on 06-22-2005 07:26 PM

I think this has got to be the weirdest question I've seen asked so far
I think they've localised most gas (petrol) explosions to static electricity, rather than from a mobile phone. Apparently many more women suffer it as they get in and out of the car a lot more than men when at the petrol station.
Anyway, I don't think anything can ever be guaranteed a 00% safe, and you're unlikely to get an answer from Creative saying that it is.

Unicode mixup in fonts

I have a question about unicode mixups. I have a lot of old files with old fonts. If I need to upgrade some file, sometimes I need to change a font. Now some fonts will get you the problem that the unicode of the glyphs is not recognised or mixed up. Like when I have the word 'test' in Garamond Expert I want to change that to 'test' in Caslon Expert. It will give me '____'. If I look at the unicodes (easy copy/paste into the search/replace-enige) it does not say 'test' but something like <B776><B7765><B782><B771> (I am making these up) where <B776> stands for 't' etc. Now I do not want to replace each individual glyph nor want to miss out any. But a simple replacing of the font is not possible. Looking at the fonts coding in fontographer one can see that the 't' actually is at unicode <B776> but not at 't' where it should be. It worked in the past tough, so why not now! Strangely enough, if you type new text next to it (so in the same font) like 'test'test, the unicode says its '<B776><B7765><B782><B771>test' and the second part of the text will be converted like I want it. Also I find QuarkXPress has no problem with converting 'test' into Caslon Expert. (Original file was a Quark-document; used file was an update after I changed to InDesign couple of years ago)

Can you repeat your experiment and report the actual numbers you are seeing per character?
I don't think it has to do anything with Unicode. "Expert" fonts used to be notorious, because it assigned non-standard glyphs (characters) to standard codes -- to get an "ffl" ligature, you'd type a tilde. And most "Expert" fonts didn't comply to Adobe's "ExpertEncoding", so switching from one expert font to another wasn't guaranteed to be safe.
If a font is Unicode-compliant, this entire problem disappears, if only for the reason Unicode does *not* assign code points to expert symbols! But Opentype fonts do, and the Opentype code assures ligatures are applied automatically, and are translated back to their constituent characters when you apply another font which doesn't have the ligatures.
Modern fonts with all 'expert' options aren't called "Expert" anymore; look for Opentype Pro fonts. The Garamond Pro that came for free with your InDesign is a good example of a well-behaving, Unicode-compliant, automatically ligating and small-capping expert font.
function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}
Also I find QuarkXPress has no problem with converting 'test' into Caslon Expert.
I find it hard to believe QXP can translate from one "Expert" set in a font to another one with another encoding. Either the encoding is the same, and then you shouldn't have a problem in ID as well, or it's different.

C++/CUDA DLL fails to give correct results when running a second time

Hi all.
I just finished writing a C++/CUDA DLL that runs in labview.
It passes a 3d array, crunches the data, then spits out some results as a 2d array.
When I open labview, and run it, I get the predicted results. However if I run the labview code again, it gives me garbage data.
I have to not only close the open VI, but all of labview itself, reopen it, and then it will work again for one run.
I read a thread on somthing similar to this happening with C++ code due to the way labview handled threads, however this was over 10 years ago, and it seems that since LV 2008 this has been fixed. I am running LV 2011.
In my code, I checked that all dynamic memory allocated gets deleted, both on the GPU and CPU so other than that, I'm not sure what the problem could be. What changes when I call the DLL a second time?
Please ask me to clarify anything that you might need to know about the program, and its implimentation.
I have written other labview DLLs in just C++ that have not had this problem, so I wonder if it is a CUDA specific thing, or maybe somthing else I am overlooking.

It seems to be that something not properly closed. What you can try is - unload DLL.
CUDA Compute Context should be theoretically not necessary if your CUDA functions executed "all in one call" (and properly closed at all). The reason for NI Compute is following: it is not guaranteed that thread safe DLL calls will be called in the same thread. So, for example if you have three separate DLL calls in LabVIEW, for example - transfer data to GPU memory, compute, transfer back to the host - they should be done in the same thread (in CUDA terms all functions should be executed within same context). You can call these functions in UI thread - it will work, but the UI thread will be blocked. Or you can mark calls as thread safe, and using NI Compute - then all three calls will be done within same thread and this thread is separated from UI thread.
Andrey.

Why use mac app store

ok so I have been looking for an article as to why one would want to use the mac app store as oppsoed to just finding what you want online.
im guessing the app store is safer... you cant get a virus from an app downloaded from there.
And it updates through the app store... but sometimes I see apps that dont update on the app store but DO update on the website.
I also wish app store had an 'related apps' bar under the app you are currently viewing so you can see other choices of similar products and their ratings.

ok so I have been looking for an article as to why one would want to use the mac app store as oppsoed to just finding what you want online.
You are correct that downloading from the App Store is safer. Apps in the App Store have been "cleared" by Apple, and they also have to abide by strict sandboxing restrictions (which limit what the apps are able to do). Although that's not a guarantee that an app couldn't do something sneaky, it certainly does limit the possibilities and makes it very unlikely that this would be a concern.
Because App Store apps are limited in capabilities, you may from time to time need to download something from a source outside the App Store. When you do, as long as the app is created by a developer who is registered with Apple, and the app is "code signed" by that developer using a certificate issued by Apple, then you will be able to open that app as well. (Unless you have changed your Gatekeeper settings to only allow App Store apps.) Such apps cannot be guaranteed to be safe, but if a developer is discovered to be distributing signed malware, Apple can simple revoke the developer's certificate and the app will no longer open.
By default, you will be prevented from opening apps that are not signed, which present the highest risks.
For more information on this sort of stuff, see my Mac Malware Guide.

Mac stuck in safe mode start up loop

Hi everyone,
it seems I have run into a problem and can't find answers online.
First off I have a MacBook intel core duo on the latest snow leopard and mac software is up to date.
It all started when I had to restore my iPhone and it had some problems and got stuck in dfu mode, so when I decided to reboot it I unpluged it and went to reboot and problems started. Finder kept crashing. When I started up in safe mode I decided to save some important files and when I was done the finder problems persisted even while in safe mode. When I rebooted it would start up in safe mode and the loading bar on the bottom would get about a fifth of the way and stop, it would try again and get the as far as before and then shut down.
I tried taking out and putting back in the HD and ram as well as verbose mode. It says
Disk0s2: I/o error
invalid node structure
(8, 12827)
**the volume mac HD could not be verified completely.
/dev/rdisk0s2 (hfs) exited with signal 8
When I decided all was hopeless I tried reinstalling the os but it got stuck on examining additional disks.
If you need any info let me know. HUGE thanks ahead of time as I am writing this from my iPhone 2g and have a useless MacBook and dfu'd iPhone 4.

Restart from your installer disc. Do not run the installer. Instead, from the Utilities menu select Disk Utility & run its Repair Disk step. If it can repair the HD, try reinstalling the OS again. If it cannot, you can try a more powerful (& expensive) disk repair utility like Disk Warrior, which may or may not be able to repair the damage. Otherwise, you will need to reformat the HD (losing all its data) to recover.
You should always have a backup of your data. If you do not, it may be worth gambling on the price of Disk Warrior, but remember that there are no guarantees it can repair the damage.

Attempting to open Firefox freezes computer, requiring system shutdown via On/Off button. Opening FF in Safe Mode doesn't help anything.

I was using Firefox just fine as I have been for years, and when I tried to open it today after restarting the machine, it froze the computer almost completely (mouse works, but clicking it anywhere does nothing and ctrl + alt + del does not work). Sometimes even the mouse ceases to work. The only way to react to this is to shut down the system by cutting the energy (On/Off button) as I have waited up to 5 minutes and the system does not recover.
I have tried opening the Safe Mode dialog box (start -> run -> firefox -safe-mode) and choosing the options to disable extensions and toolbars and "reset user preferences to FF defaults" and click "apply and restart" and the computer freezes. If I hit the "continue with Safe Mode" button instead, I get to see the FF screen with a blank tab on it but the computer freezes as well.
I am completely baffled by this sudden problem. I am having to type this from Google Chrome and thus I cannot supply troubleshooting information, sadly. I am sure it is not conflict with antiviruses because I have not installed any new firewalls or antiviruses before the problem started.
I tried downloading Firefox 8.0 and installing it (was previously on 7.0) but it didn't help at all. I also tried running FF with Windows on Safe Mode, but the freeze still happens.
Please help me, my life depends on ReminderFox reminding me of stuff and now I can't access it :,-(. I need FF back ASAP!
Thanks a whole lot!
'''Addendum:''' The freeze is also happening at random even without opening Firefox, it has a chance of happening when I click something. My computer has frozen when I: 1- clicked the "reveal desktop" button to minimize all windows; 2- Attempted to close a tab in Chrome; 3- Clicked "play" in a Youtube video that had been loaded and waiting for some time). It will also almost always freeze when I leave it idle for more than about 10 minutes.
But it will '''guaranteedly''' freeze when trying to open FF, which doesn't happen with any other program.
I think my computer is breaking down. :(

'''Addendum:''' The freeze is also happening at random even without opening Firefox, it has a chance of happening when I click something. My computer has frozen when I: 1- clicked the "reveal desktop" button to minimize all windows; 2- Attempted to close a tab in Chrome; 3- Clicked "play" in a Youtube video that had been loaded and waiting for some time). It will also almost always freeze when I leave it idle for more than about 10 minutes.
But it will '''guaranteedly''' freeze when trying to open FF, which doesn't happen with any other program.
I think my computer is breaking down. :(

Is it safe to update to iOS 5.1.1?

Hi,
I have an iPad 2 (64GB WiFi) running 4.3.3 and an iPhone 4 (16GB) running 4.3.5 and would like to know if it is safe to update to iOS 5.1.1?
I've been doing some "Googling" and reading through this forum and what I found is not filling me with confidence... I know the much used "this is like a hospital and only sick people come here" answer, but boy there are lots of "sick people" around with iOS5 problems....
From my research I have found the following major problems:
Battery drain (will this ever go away???)
Problematic WiFi connections after update (worked fine before)
Safari crashes on sites with lots of pictures and video
Apps crashing more than they are actually working (all worked fine before update)
Unresponsiveness of device (as if it is not quite capable of running iOS5)
SIM card read errors (iPhone)
Bluetooth no longer connecting to factory fitted bluetooth car systems (iPhone)
My only previous update is experience is with a 3rd generation iPod Touch which after the update to iOS4 (which broke the video app) and then iOS5 (which at least fixed the video app) is only good for playing music. It so laggy that doing anything else with it is basically impossible.
The iPad 2 & iPhone 4 were designed for iOS4 and not iOS5. Are the iPad 2 & iPhone 4 processors up to the task of fully running iOS5 and specifically 5.1.1 without any glitches and lagging? I'd rather stay on the current version than having my user experience tanked by devices that it not quite capable of running the new version of iOS problem free. I am not one of those people that MUST have the latest version of iOS not matter what. My devices working reliably is much more imporatant that a flashy new iOS. I know Apple says that they are compatible, but they also said that iOS4 & iOS5 will run on a 3rd generation iPod Touch and it just does not....
Any comments and suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
Regards
Jamie

stevejobsfan0123 Sunnyvale, CA
Re: Is it safe to update to iOS 5.1.1?
Jun 11, 2012 11:08 PM (in response to jamieryan157)
Talking about iOS 4 to iOS 5 in general, I don't see why not to update. iMessage, iCloud and all the new features. There is nothing wrong with 5.1.1 and no serious bugs. Most people's issues here are not related to the OS they are running. Then there are the habitual whiners who create accounts just to tell us that battery life is awful, but they do that after every update. After a week, they all disappear. So update. I can almost guarantee you won't have any issues, and you get all iOS 5 features. You won't regret it. <<=== Base on this justification, let me tell you what i have encountered with you guarantee.
After 2 week of upgrade from iOS 5.1.1, this is what I have encountered.
1) Replace my old SIM Card, as it was totally corrupted by iOS 5.1.1
2) 2 weeks after new SIM Card replacement, [No SIM Card Installed] error emerged. Eventually, you are required to reboot your devices everytime just to ensure your iPhone is back to normal.
If the above, is not an issue; please proceed with his guarantee and upgrade.
If one person complaint No SIM Card Installed issue, you can Blame on bad LUCK. Yet there are alot of people started to post about it; tell me it is their BAD LUCK as well?? There is some definate condition where cause this error.
GOOD LUCK on upgrading to iOS 5.1.1, You NEED it.
As of now, i am just praying when iOS 6 came out; i have not choice to consider upgrade.

Won't boot into safe mode

My 2012 iMac 27" was randomly rebooting itself, while in Sleep. I assumed this was due to the cheap 32 GB memory I bought, but before I could change it back to the original memory, to test, the Mac booted into Safe Mode (I assume - a progress bar showing at the bottom of the boot screen, below the Apple logo), and did not get further than a half the way, and then shut down. I swapped the memory to the original 8GB. I tried booting again, no buttons held down, as then it wouldn't get further than a quarter of the way. Further attempts to boot do not work, even when holding down Option to choose the boot disk, pressing Shift for Safe Mode, or Option-S for Single User Mode. I assume it's trying to boot in Safe Mode, but failing?
I also tried using a good Mac with the bad Mac as the Target Disk boot mode - the good Mac does not see the bad Mac...
I have an external DVD drive, but that isn't an option as I can't go into boot drive select mode. What are my options, apart from sending the iMac back?

Booting into the Recovery HD should allow you to effect repairs - that's the point of it, so it's a bit concerning that it won't allow you to. The Recovery HD is a partition on the internal drive that should allow you to effect repairs to the Macintosh HD, albeit part of the same physical disk.
I'm no expert, but I'd be concerned that the hard disk is on the way out. Do you have backup of everything - Time Machine or a bootable clone, perhaps?
Maybe have another try with Command+r. If it fails I'm not sure what would be the best next step - it depends if you have a full and up-to-date backup of your disk so that you can restore.
One of the options of the Recovery HD is to allow you to re-install the OS, which won't delete your data.
The more extreme step would be Internet Recovery which would involve erasing everything and re-installing via the internet.
Worth reading this carefully before proceeding: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4718
Disk Warrior from Alsoft (not cheap) is another possibility for recovering damaged disks, although it's not a guaranteed solution.

Is it safe to delete CiFiles folder on Windows storage Server 2008

Hi Team,
.ci file growing in "C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Microsoft\Search\Data\Applications\Windows\Projects\SystemIndex\Indexer\CiFiles" location. Is it safe to delete the CI file. please let me know, any other way to disable
the growth of CI files.
What is the route cause? This is file server using windows storage server 2008 OS.
How to avoid in future this type of issue?
My total hard disk size 80 GB but now free space only 110 Almost full my hard disk. So please help to advise how to clear
all ci files?
Thanks in advance

Hi,
When you use indexing service, the service create .ci files. The files are content index files on the server. As long as the service is not running you should not encounter any problems if you delete the folder.
Is it safe to delete CiFiles folder on Windows Server 2008 R2
http://www.wincert.net/tips/windows-server/1948-is-it-safe-to-delete-cifiles-folder-on-windows-server-2008-r2
Please Note: Since the website is not hosted by Microsoft, the link may change without notice. Microsoft does not guarantee the accuracy of this information.
Regards,
Mandy
We
are trying to better understand customer views on social support experience, so your participation in this
interview project would be greatly appreciated if you have time.
Thanks for helping make community forums a great place.

Is it safe to back up a disk image file when it's mounted?

Hi -
I use some small, encrypted ".sparsebundle" disk image files to keep my diary, banking info, etc., on. When I'm at the computer, I keep them mounted all the time.
Is it safe to let Time Machine automatically back up the .sparsebundle disk image files, even while they are mounted? Or would there be a possibility the backups would be corrupted, if the operating system hadn't written out cached data or something to the disk image file?
In other words, if I save any open documents on the mounted disk image, does the disk image file on disk always contain the fully-saved document and a consistent file system? Or could there still be some data cached in RAM, that would not be saved at the time the .sparsebundle file was copied? Is it always necessary to unmount a disk image before duplicating its .sparsebundle file?
Do I need to turn off Time Machine's automatic backup, and just do manual "backup now" after unmounting the disk images? That's a major pain in the behind... I really want to just let Time Machine do it's hourly backups as usual, but of course there's no point if the backups are corrupt.
Of course my own guess is "to be safe", I should unmount them before backing up. But again it's a big pain if it's not actually necessary. Does anyone know for sure?
Thanks...

My understanding is that Unix, generally, doesn't write everything out to disk immediately. There is caching in RAM to speed up disk access, including modified superblocks, modified inodes, and delayed reads and writes. Now, if you ask to read an individual file, the kernel makes sure all the cached data is written before it returns the read data. But if you try to do, for example, a block copy of the whole filesystem, the kernel doesn't know that, and there's no guarantee or expectation that the filesystem will be in a coherent state.
That's the purpose, for example, of the "sync" command - to write all this cached data to disk before unmounting, shutting down, etc., and, that's why the OS gets so upset if you just unplug a firewire drive. Because even if you've saved and closed any open documents, they haven't necessarily been fully written out to disk yet.
So what I don't understand, is how people are ever able to back up mounted disk image files without them getting corrupted. I mean, you'd think they would get corrupted all the time. It would be the equivalent of just unplugging your firewire drive before you made a backup of it, or of doing a block copy of a read/write mounted filesystem. There ought to be a very good chance of the filesystem being scrambled. So, why does it not happen?
Is there something different about the Apple filesystem, or Apple disk images? Or, maybe we're only talking about delay times in the cache of fractions of a second, so as long as you haven't written anything within a few seconds of the copy, and don't write anything during it, you're ok?
Even if Apple reps won't answer my question, the kernel and most likely all the low-level disk i/o and filesystem stuff is open source. Surely there's someone out there who would be knowledgeable enough to give a definitive answer? I was hoping to find someone like that here... I do appreciate your taking the time to answer my post, but maybe I need to go elsewhere, on some developers' mailing lists or something? Does anyone know of such a place I could start looking?
Thanks...

Is Persistence context thread safe? nop

In my code, i have a servlet , 2 stateless session beans:
in the servlet, i use jndi to find a stateless bean (A) and invoke a method methodA in A:
(Stateless bean A):
@EJB
StatelessBeanB beanB;
methodA(obj) {
beanB.save(obj);
(Stateless bean B, where container inject a persistence context):
@PersistenceContext private EntityManager em;
save(obj) {
em.persist(obj);
it is said entity manager is not thread safe, so it should not be an instance variable. But in the code above, the variable "em" is an instance variable of stateless bean B, Does it make sense to put it there using pc annotation? is it then thread safe when it is injected (manager) by container?
since i think B is a stateless session bean, so each request will share the instance variable of B class which is not a thread safe way.
So , could you please give me any guide on this problem? make me clear.
any is appreciated. thank you
and what if i change stateless bean B to
(Stateless bean B, where container inject a persistence context):
@PersistenceUnit private EntityManagerFactory emf;
save(obj) {
em = emf.creatEntityManager()
//begin tran
em.persist(obj);
// commit tran
//close em
the problem is i have several stateless beans like B, if each one has a emf injected, is there any problem ?

Hi Jacky,
An EntityManager object is not thread-safe. However, that's not a problem when accessing an EntityManager from EJB bean instance state. The EJB container guarantees that no more than one thread has access to a particular bean instance at any given time. In the case of stateless session beans, the container uses as many distinct bean instances as there are concurrent requests.
Storing an EntityManager object in servlet instance state would be a problem, since in the servlet programming model any number of concurrent threads share the same servlet instance.
--ken

Thread-safe alternative to XmlValue

Hi,
I'm using bdb xml in an application which visualizes 3d data stored in xml. When I load the data, it will be written into the db and I#m using XPath as query language. This works quite good, but as I'm using multiple threads within my application, I can't use XmlValues for referencing into the database, because they are not thread-safe. But I need to store at least some of those references to get quick access to some data, or to run a new query, based on a result node from an earlier query, later from another thread. Those referenced nodes will change during runtime, so indices won't help. So what can I do or did I miss something?
Thanks
Bjoern

Bjoern,
You may have to explain a bit more, especially the part about "referenced nodes will change during runtime." XmlValue objects that reference nodes are only guaranteed valid until the either (1) the XmlResults object containing them has been deleted or (2) the transaction in which they were retrieved ends. There are exceptions but those are the general rules.
The interfaces, XmlValue::getNodeHandle() and XmlContainer::getNode() exist to allow an application to store a string value that can be later resolved quickly back into an XmlValue. This works well unless the referenced node has been removed. It may be the answer you are looking for.
Regards,
George

HTTP request/response object not thread safe.

According to the serlvet spec. Http Request/Response
are not thread safe. Quoting from the Spec:
" Implementations of the request and response objects are not guaranteed to be thread safe. This means that they should only be used within the scope of the request handling thread. References to the request and response objects must not be given to objects executing in other threads as the resulting behavior may be nondeterministic."
This has prompt me to ask the following question.
For Example I have a servlet which does the following
request.setAttribute("myVar","Hello");
The request and response is dispatched(using RequestDispatch.include(request,response)) to another
servlet which retrieve this attribute i.e request.getAttribute("myVar");
Is this safe?
The Spec only said "The Container Provider must ensure that the dispatch of the request to a target
servlet occurs in the same thread of the same VM as the original request." I take this meaning that the targeting servlet does not have to run in the same thread(only dispatch), otherwise it would be safe.

To put it another way, you can only have onle thing working on a request at a time. For instance, the ServletContext is available to all servlets running on a server. If you tried to save a particular request to the ServletContext, it would potentially be available to many concurrently running servlets. They could all change whatever in it at the same time. Each servlet is in its own running thread. Hope that helps some.

Switch from safe mode to normal mode problem

my comuter is stuck in safe mode , when start up i press f8 and try starting in normal mode but it still goes to safe mode . how can i fix that?

Hi,
First, please let me know if there is any program or updates installed before the issue occurs.
You may take the following steps to test this issue:
1. Boot the system using the “Last known good configuration”:
1). Turn on your machine
2). Immediately begin tapping the F8 key repeatedly (If you get to the Windows startup screen start over)
3). When the Startup Options menu comes up select “Last known good configuration”
4). Let the computer attempt to boot into Windows
If this successfully gets you booted into Vista you should be ok. Your system will function as it did before. If this does not get you booted into Vista
normally we can try running the System File Scanner.
2. System File Scanner
1). Turn on your machine
2). Immediately begin tapping the F8 key repeatedly (If you get to the Windows startup screen start over)
3). When the Startup Options menu comes up select “Safe Mode with Command Prompt”
4). At the command prompt type this command sfc /scannow
5). Then press enter
This utility will look for damaged or missing system files and attempt to correct the problem. When it finishes, it will tell you the results (example:
SFC found and fixed problems). Restart your system normally. If you boot successfully into Vista, the problem should be solved. Let us know if either of these steps solve the problem.
Regards,
Sabrina
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties or guarantees, and confers no rights. |Please remember to click “Mark as Answer” on the post that helps you, and to click “Unmark as Answer” if a marked post does not actually answer your question.
This can be beneficial to other community members reading the thread.

Is FI_DOCUMNT guaranteed to be safe?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for