Loop condition in Workflow

Hi experts,
Can you set the looping frequency in Workflow, i.e. only loop after at a certain time or after some generated number or using a date?

Then you have to put this method inside a loop unless all the documents are there. This method will be executed depends upon you every 2 hours or 1 hour depending on the statistics. Or you can try to check some user Exit in the document transaction that will check whether all the documents are there and if it is there it should trigger a custom event and that event will be kept in the wait for event step.
It completey depends upon the business and the statistics and you what to do.
The second approach is the best but if you dont have option you should go for the first one.
Thanks
Arghadip

Similar Messages

BPM: Loop condition not coming outside of the loop

Hi Experts,
I am working on BPM. In the loop I am giving the condition as
(ForSyncResponse./p1:MT_Test_JDBC_Req_response/row_response/Row/indicator u2260 9)
If indication not equal to the 9(Integer) then it should come out of the loop otherwise loop needs to be repeat( Iam getting this data from the database through Send Synch step). When ever iam sending data other than 9 then it repeating if I send 9 also even though the loop condition is not satisfying and its keep on repeating the loop. Can you please let me know what might be ther problem.
Thanks & Regards,
Purushotham

Hi Prasadh,
         I am able to give thie "Create the following expression in the expression editor:
/MT_Test_JDBC_Req_response/row_responseindicator != 9" expression
           How can i give the second"(/MT_Test_JDBC_Req_response/row_responseindicator != 9 EX)" condition??
          I tried with giving the AND but it is not allowing me to enter the 9.
     Can you please let me know.
Thanks & Regards,
Purushotham

BPM Loop Condition ?

We have a output xml in BPM as shown below :
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<Product>
<ProductRecord>
<ProductID schemeID="MaterialNumber" schemeAgencyID="MDM30_FILEADAPTER01" schemeAgencySchemeAgencyID="ZZZ">KRANTI_MAT1</ProductID>
<ProductID schemeID="ProductGUID" schemeAgencyID="QM3_002" schemeAgencySchemeAgencyID="ZZZ">416452CBD0746B23E10000000A1553FC</ProductID>
<ProductTypeCode>01</ProductTypeCode>
<Category>
<CategoryID schemeID="ProductCategoryGUID" schemeAgencyID="QM3_002" schemeAgencySchemeAgencyID="ZZZ">4162C19D0C250E78E10000000A1553FC</CategoryID>
<CategoryID schemeID="StandardCategoryID" schemeAgencyID="MDM30_FILEADAPTER01" schemeAgencySchemeAgencyID="ZZZ">MATCLASS2_ROOT</CategoryID>
</Category>
</ProductRecord>
</Product>
The product id tag is 1..undbounded.
We want a loop condition in BPM wherein as soon as we get a line of ProductID with   schemeID="ProductGUID" then we want to exit the loop.
Can anybody help us with the loop condition.
Regards,
Anurag

Hi Prasadh,
         I am able to give thie "Create the following expression in the expression editor:
/MT_Test_JDBC_Req_response/row_responseindicator != 9" expression
           How can i give the second"(/MT_Test_JDBC_Req_response/row_responseindicator != 9 EX)" condition??
          I tried with giving the AND but it is not allowing me to enter the 9.
     Can you please let me know.
Thanks & Regards,
Purushotham

Step type 'condition' in workflow

hai all.....
I have got a problem while working with the step type 'condition' in workflow,i.e i want to check the values in internal table in my step type for example,whether the internal table is initial....please someone help me ..its very urgent...

Hi Kiran,
For the Operator 'NX' u need not enter any comparison value. U click on the condition in the condition step type . A window appears and u click on the internal table in expression 1 and the operator as 'NX' . It doesnt need a comparison value.
Now u check this with the test data in the same window . U will have an icon in the bottom of window to enter test data and another icon to evalutate it . U check it with data and without data. It will work .
In ur reply to Kasi , Ur answer is not at all related with what kasi asked for .U can check the initial property while the data is in workflow container itself . Instead u r passing the data from workflow container to task container and then to method container and then the processing has to take place in BO and again the reverse should take place .Which is Unnecessary .
Regards,
Scobby.
Be Free To Award Points

I pull fiftyfour bytes of data from MicroProcessor's EEPROM using serial port. It works fine. I then send a request for 512 bytes and my "read" goes into loop condition, no bytes are delivered and system is lost

I pull fiftyfour bytes of data from MicroProcessor's EEPROM using serial port. It works fine. I then send a request for 512 bytes and my "read" goes into loop condition, no bytes are delivered and system is lost

Hello,
You mention that you send a string to the microprocessor that tells it how many bytes to send. Instead of requesting 512 bytes, try reading 10 times and only requesting about 50 bytes at a time.
If that doesn�t help, try directly communicating with your microprocessor through HyperTerminal. If you are not on a Windows system, please let me know. Also, if you are using an NI serial board instead of your computer�s serial port, let me know.
In Windows XP, go to Start, Programs, Accessories, Communications, and select HyperTerminal.
Enter a name for the connection and click OK.
In the next pop-up dialog, choose the COM port you are using to communicate with your device and click OK.
In the final pop
-up dialog, set the communication settings for communicating with your device.
Type the same commands you sent through LabVIEW and observe if you can receive the first 54 bytes you mention. Also observe if data is returned from your 512 byte request or if HyperTerminal just waits.
If you do not receive the 512 byte request through HyperTerminal, your microprocessor is unable to communicate with your computer at a low level. LabVIEW uses the same Windows DLLs as HyperTerminal for serial communication. Double check the instrument user manual for any additional information that may be necessary to communicate.
Please let me know the results from the above test in HyperTerminal. We can then proceed from there.
Grant M.
National Instruments

JMM: legal to optimize non-volatile flag out of particular loop condition?

Does Java Memory Model allow JIT compiler to optimize non-volatile flag out of loop conditions in code like as follows...
class NonVolatileConditionInLoop {
private int number;
private boolean writingReady = true; // non-volatile, always handled inside synchronized block
public synchronized void setNumber(int n) {
    while (!writingReady) { // non-volatile flag in loop condition
      try { wait(); }
      catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); }
    this.number = n;
    this.writingReady = false;
    notifyAll();
public synchronized int getNumber() {
    while (writingReady) { // non-volatile flag in loop condition
      try { wait(); }
      catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); }
    this.writingReady = true;
    notifyAll();
    return number;
}...so that it will execute like this:
class NonVolatileConditionInLoopHacked {
private int number;
private boolean writingReady = true; // non-volatile, always handled inside synchronized block
public synchronized void setNumber(int n) {
    if (!writingReady) { // moved out of loop condition
      while (true) {
        try { wait(); }
        catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); }
    this.number = n;
    this.writingReady = false;
    notifyAll();
public synchronized int getNumber() {
    if (writingReady) { // moved out of loop condition
      while (true) {
        try { wait(); }
        catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); }
    this.writingReady = true;
    notifyAll();
    return number;
This question was recently discussed in [one of threads|http://forums.sun.com/thread.jspa?messageID=11001801#11001801|thread] at New To Java forum.
My take on it is that optimization like above is legal. From the perspective of single-threaded program, repeated checks for writingReady are redundant because it is not modified within the loop. As far as I understand, unless explicitly forced by volatile modifier (and in our case it is not), optimizing compiler "has a right" to optimize based on single-thread execution assumption.
Opposite opinion is that JMM prohibits such an optimization because methods containing the loop(s) are synchronized.

gnat wrote:
...so that it will execute like this:
class NonVolatileConditionInLoopHacked {
private int number;
private boolean writingReady = true; // non-volatile, always handled inside synchronized block
public synchronized void setNumber(int n) {
if (!writingReady) { // moved out of loop condition
while (true) {
try { wait(); }
catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); }
this.number = n;
this.writingReady = false;
notifyAll();
public synchronized int getNumber() {
if (writingReady) { // moved out of loop condition
while (true) {
try { wait(); }
catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); }
this.writingReady = true;
notifyAll();
return number;
This question was recently discussed in [one of threads|http://forums.sun.com/thread.jspa?messageID=11001801#11001801|thread] at New To Java forum.
My take on it is that optimization like above is legal. From the perspective of single-threaded program, repeated checks for writingReady are redundant because it is not modified within the loop. As far as I understand, unless explicitly forced by volatile modifier (and in our case it is not), optimizing compiler "has a right" to optimize based on single-thread execution assumption.
Opposite opinion is that JMM prohibits such an optimization because methods containing the loop(s) are synchronized.One of the problems with wait() and your the proposed optimization is that "interrupts and spurious wakeups are possible" from wait() . See [http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/lang/Object.html#wait()] Therefore your wait() would loop without checking if this optimization would occur and a interrupt or spurious wake-up happened. Therefore for this reason I do not believe writingReady would be rolled out of the loop. Also the code isn't even equivalent. Once all the threads wake-up due to the notifyAll() they would spin in the while(true) and wait() again. I don't think the JMM prohibits such an optimization because methods containing the loop(s) are synchronized, but because it contains a wait(). The wait() is kind of a temporary flow control escape out of the loop.
Example:
writingReady is true
Thread A calls getNumber(). It waits().
Thread B calls setNumber(). It calls notifyAll() and writingReady is now false;
Thread A wakes up in getNumber() and while(true) loop and waits again(). //Big problem.

Less or less than equal in the for loop condition

Hi,
What do you prefer, what is more common, which one is more easily readable, less or less than equal in the for loop condition?
for (int i = 0; i < arr.lenght; i++){..}
//or
for (int i = 0; i <= arr.lenght - 1 ; i++){..}I know this is basic programming and nothing to do with Java, so if this forum is not for this purpose, could you please suggest a general programming forum?
I would really appreciate it as I have many general questions :)
Thanks in advance,
lemonboston

lemonboston wrote:
Hi,
What do you preferPersonal preference, which is useless to you
, what is more common,Based on years of reading open source code, the first
which one is more easily readable, less or less than equal in the for loop condition?Personal opinion, which is useless to you
I would really appreciate it as I have many general questions :)If you don't want to think about it yourself (which you should be doing in stead of asking general questions), simply attack it lazily. Both examples achieve exactly the same, but the first one is less to type and to read.

Help with a while loop condition

I'm trying to write to a File. I ask the user for input, then I enter a while loop and test the condition. The loop works, but it won't stop. I've tried everything. Here is my code please help!!
thanks
inputline = keyboard.readLine();//read the keyboard
try{
while( inputline != null ){
DiskOut.println( inputline );
DiskOut.flush();
inputline = keyboard.readLine();//read the keyboard again
}//end while
}//end try
catch (IOException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}//end catch
also i've tried these while loop conditions:
while(inputline != "\n" || inputline != "\r") and the sort

while(inputline != "\n" || inputline != "\r")The condition
X!=Y OR X!=Z (given Y != Z)
is always true. X will always not be equal to at least one of the values. So you'll want to use:
while(!inputline.equals("\n") && !inputline.equals("\r"))In other words, "while inputline is not equal to either of them". Note the use of && instead of ||.
If "keyboard" is simply a BufferedReader on top of System.in (and not your own class), the trailing line feeds and carriage returns won't even be in the string returned by readLine(). Your best bet is this:
while(null != inputline && 0 != inputline.length())Make sure you type the two parts of that AND condition in the order above. If for whatever reason there are trailing \r and \n on the strings, you'll want to accomodate for platforms that may include both characters.
// trim the trailing newline characters
while(inputline.endsWith("\r") ||
inputline.endsWith("\n")) {
inputline = inputline.substring(0,inputline.length()-1);
// or maybe this will work if you don't mind losing
// the whitespace at the beginning of the string:
inputline = inputline.trim();Hope that helps somewhat.

New object inside loop condition

I would like to create new object inside loop condition and use in its body
while(new File(localization).exists()){
//now would like use File object created above
}What's the notation for that?

YoungWinston wrote:
TheGreatEmperor wrote:
I would like to create new object inside loop condition and use in its body
while(new File(localization).exists()){
//now would like use File object created above
}What's the notation for that?Encephalopathic gave it to you, but I'd worry about ending up with a never-ending loop. What about
if ((myFile = new File(fileString)).exists()) { ...instead?
Winston1) Same thing I put (except change the name "f" with "myFile")
2) you could get a never-ending loop with your answer (depending on the body)
3) The previous answer by Encephalopathic would NOT give a never-ending loop unless there was a never-ending listing of files with the name:
"Foo" + fileCounter + ".txt"; where "fileCounter" is incrementing (as done in his code)

Re: loop condition using length

Hi friends,
in a loop condition i am using below coding.
LOOP AT I_FORM1 INTO W_FORM1.
A = STRLEN( W_FORM1-LOTNO ).
LOOP AT I_AUFM INTO W_AUFM WHERE CHARG+0(A) = W_FORM1-LOTNO.
ENDLOOP.
ENDLOOP.
But coming error is
The length specification "(A)" is not a numeric literal or a numeric constant.
how is it possible please help me any body.

Hello ,
Data type of variable A should be a integer .
Edited by: Annasaheb More on Jul 2, 2011 9:20 AM

Endless loop condition

Hi there,
Working on a client/server chat application. On the client side app, everytime I want to send a message I create a new Thread called "SendingThread". See below.
import java.io.*;
import java.net.*;
public class SendingThread extends Thread
private Socket clientSocket;
private String messageToSend;
public SendingThread(Socket socket, String userName, String message)
       super("SendingThread: " + socket);
       clientSocket = socket;
       messageToSend = userName + Constants.MESSAGE_SEPERATOR + message;
public void run()
       try
            PrintWriter writer = new PrintWriter(clientSocket.getOutputStream());
            writer.println(messageToSend);
            writer.flush();
            writer.close();
       catch(IOException ioe)
            System.out.println("Server must have closed connection");
            ioe.printStackTrace();
}As you can see the line writer.close() is important in regard to a Thread that is running on the server app called "ReceivingThread" (see below). In the ReceivingThread there is a line:
if((temp = input.readLine()) != null)
It blocks until I actually send a message to read in. This is expected. However, now I have a catch 22 situation. On the client side app, since I called writer.close(), this was necessary in order to get a null value during the readLine() call on the ReceivingThread on the server. The one line gets processed as expected. The stream is now closed and on the server side app, since this is true, the next iteration of the while loop attempts to read in another line but now it is alway null and thus I wind up with an endless loop condition. I introduced a "count" variable and a condition only so that the loop wouldn't get away too far. I was hoping it would block again, but it isn't. I believe the ReceivingThread is written correctly, but I need to somehow obtain a null value on the stream for message completion and also have the ReceivingThread block for the next message coming in.
Please advise,
Alan
public class ReceivingThread extends Thread
private BufferedReader input;
private MessageListener messageListener;
private boolean keepListening = true;
public ReceivingThread(MessageListener listener, Socket clientSocket)
       super("ReceivingThread: " + clientSocket);
       messageListener = listener;
       try
            clientSocket.setSoTimeout(50000);
            input = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(clientSocket.getInputStream()));
       catch(IOException ioe){ioe.printStackTrace();}
public void run()
       StringBuffer messageBuffer = new StringBuffer();
       String temp = "";
       int messageCount = 0;
       int count = 0;
         //START:
         while(keepListening)
           while(true)
              try
                //In order to receive a null, the client app
                //has to close the stream! Otherwise, this
                //will block indefinitely.
                System.out.println("blocking...");
                if((temp = input.readLine()) != null)
                   if(messageCount == 0)
                        messageBuffer.append(temp);
                        messageCount++;
                        System.out.println("temp: " + temp);
                   else
                     //When we use the readLine method, it strips
                     //off the newline character, so we need to
                     //put it back.
                     messageBuffer.append("\n" + temp);
                     System.out.println("temp: " + temp);
                else
                     break;
              catch(IOException ioe)
                   System.out.println("IOException...");
                   ioe.printStackTrace();
                   //break;
           }//end while
            //System.out.println("out of inner while loop...message:\n" + messageBuffer.toString());
            String message = messageBuffer.toString();
            System.out.println("message: " + message);
            StringTokenizer tokenizer = new StringTokenizer(message, Constants.MESSAGE_SEPERATOR);
            if(tokenizer.countTokens() == 2)
                 System.out.println("message received");
                 messageListener.messageReceived(tokenizer.nextToken(), tokenizer.nextToken());
                 //reset string variables
                 messageCount = 0;
                 temp = "";
                 messageBuffer.delete(0, messageBuffer.length());
                 message = "";
            else
                //System.out.println("checking disconnect string: " + message);
               if(message.equalsIgnoreCase(Constants.MESSAGE_SEPERATOR + Constants.DISCONNECT_STRING))
                      stopListening();
            count++;
            if(count > 3)break;
         }//end while
         try
           //System.out.println("closing ReceivingThread");
           input.close();
         catch(IOException ioe){ioe.printStackTrace();}
public void stopListening()
       keepListening = false;
}Edited by: ashiers on Nov 21, 2007 7:33 AM
Edited by: ashiers on Nov 21, 2007 7:34 AM

I'm not quite sure what you want to happen here. Here is what I would expect from the code you posted:
*1.* The client connects and sends its message to the server.
*2.* The server iterates through the line-reading loop until it exhausts the input (input.readLine() == null) and breaks out of the while (true) loop. The "temp: foo" messages are written to standard output accordingly.
*3.* The server reaches the message portion of the loop and writes the "message: foo" to standard output.
*4.* The server hits the end of the "while (keepListening)" loop and (assuming that you didn't receive a disconnect message) keepListening is still true. So it loops back around.
*5.* The first time through the while (true) loop, the input is still empty (of course). So you get a null.
*6.* Next, you get a "message: foo" output.
*7.* Repeat *4* through *6* until your computer hardware fails or you abort the program. (Except that you added that count thing, so it'll loop three times and then break.)
What are you trying to make the "keepListening" loop do? It doesn't seem like it should be there at all. At no point does this reading thread get the opportunity to read from any other socket. It almost seems like you want to spawn one ReceivingThread for each Socket you receive from the ServerSocket; if that's the case, the main thread (or whichever thread you have running that code and spawning the ReceivingThreads should be inside of the while (keepListening) loop.
Any help?

Loop condition copy1

hello,
i am forwarding my codes here, and pls let me know how to write the loop conditions regarding this.
*& Report ZGOM1
REPORT ZGOM1.
CALL SCREEN 200.
*&      Module USER_COMMAND_0200 INPUT
      text
MODULE USER_COMMAND_0200 INPUT.
tables : ZPERSONAL.
data : begin of itab occurs 0,
       NAME LIKE ZPERSONAL-NAME,
       ADDRESS LIKE ZPERSONAL-ADDRESS,
       TELNO LIKE ZPERSONAL-TELNO,
       MOBILENO LIKE ZPERSONAL-MOBILENO,
       COUNTRY LIKE ZPERSONAL-COUNTRY,
       end of itab.
case sy-ucomm.
       when 'DISP'.
select * FROM ZPERSONAL INTO corresponding fields of ITAB.
       endselect.
       when 'EXIT'.
       LEAVE PROGRAM.
       ENDCASE.
ENDMODULE.                 " USER_COMMAND_0200 INPUT
*&      Module STATUS_0200 OUTPUT
      text
MODULE STATUS_0200 OUTPUT.
SET PF-STATUS 'xxxxxxxx'.
SET TITLEBAR 'xxx'.
move-corresponding itab to ZPERSONAL.
ENDMODULE.                 " STATUS_0200 OUTPUT
please do the needful urgently,
thanks
suja

hello,
i am forwarding my codes here, and pls let me know how to write the loop conditions regarding this.
please do the needful urgently,
thanks
suja

Infinite loop in PR workflow even if the document is now APPROVED

Hi everyone,
Our PR workflow experiences a confusion in the document's status.
A loop is being executed even if the PR document is now being APPROVED. The template, maybe, doesn't correctly read the status of the PR. Since the loop still runs, the approver is being Notified thru SAP inbox several times and this has caused the approver a sense of inconvenience and disturbance.
Please guide me on what to do.
Regards,
Reymar

Good day Aditya!
There is indeed a loop in the WF definition. It sends a workitem to SAP inbox of the approver even after it is being APPROVED already.
I checked the condition of the loop, but it is correctly defined there.
I am looking at the reason that maybe this is on the synchronization issue. I mean, the statuses both of the documents and on the workflow side do not correlate or are different.
Can I use the SWU_OBUF in PROD?
Regards,
Reymar

WS14000044: avoid loop in Completion workflow usage if all lines not compl

Dear all,
I have a question around the detailed usage of Workflow WS14000044: Completion workflow.
Here is my case:
A requisitioner creates a SC with complete items from catalog and also incomplete one's in free text (because not in his catalogs)
The approval will be a line item cost center approval (n-level line item implemented via BADI).
However prior to this cost center approvals, a purchaser needs to be involved for the incomplete lines being:
- free text
- no price
the reason is that the purchaser has more extended catalogs and will replace some free texts by catalog items not accessible by the requisitioner
or will give a price estimation to be able to have a more accurate cost center approval (which is multilevel and based on the value of the item line).
Then my idea was to use the completion workflow for it.
But my question is as when going to the purchaser this one is not replacing necessarily all the free-texts, then the user receive the changes and validate them and then the standard start conditions of this workflow that include free text evaluation will retrigger this workflow again and again and again.
1)Is this correct?
2) If not why?
3) And what must be the starting condition of the completion workflow and n-level approval workflow to avoid the loop?
Thanks in advance
RD

Thanks for the guidance, but I have additional questions:
0) Based on your answer I suppose you did not implemented it anywhere (in standard)like this? Correct?
1)For the incomplete item flag, you said "This flag is false as soon as you get out of the completion WF." is that always the case or is it only when the Purchaser as set a price?
2) In summary free text item condition for the Completion Workflow is only usefull if you are sure to convert all lines to Catalog items. Correct?
3) Coming to you proposition you loose then the possibility to approve your changes by the user like in completion workflow? Or how do you set-up the n-level approval workflow to have the requisitioner himself involved?
4) Can somebody help to find the FM to find the purchaser of the corresponding PGr?
5) How can I handle in the n-step approval workflow step if I have a purchasing Group with more than 1 purchaser?
Thanks
RD

If statement on a while loop condition

Hello,
I was just wondering whether it was possible to have an if statement on a while loop. Basically, I have a while loop that has the following terminating condition
do{
//...loop code here
while (netError > acceptableError && learningCycle < 100000 && alive);I'm looking to introduce a boolean "ignoreMaxCycles" that basically stops the loop from taking notice of the learningCycle clause of the condition.
do{
//...loop code here
while (netError > acceptableError && alive);I know it can be done repeating the two loops with an if statement governing which one is executed, but I was wondering whether there was a shorter/cleaner way of doing this?
Thanks,
Nick

nickd_101 wrote:
Hello,
I was just wondering whether it was possible to have an if statement on a while loop. Basically, I have a while loop that has the following terminating condition
do{
//...loop code here
while (netError > acceptableError && learningCycle < 100000 && alive);I'm looking to introduce a boolean "ignoreMaxCycles" that basically stops the loop from taking notice of the learningCycle clause of the condition.
do{
//...loop code here
while (netError > acceptableError && alive);I know it can be done repeating the two loops with an if statement governing which one is executed, but I was wondering whether there was a shorter/cleaner way of doing this?
Thanks,
Nick
do {
while(netError > acceptableError && (ignoreMaxCycles || learningCycle < 100000) && alive)wtf ? i took 2 minutes for that ?
Edited by: darth_code_r on Aug 29, 2008 9:21 AM

Loop condition in Workflow

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for