Multiple user processing in MD15

Hi All,
Two users access the same T code for MD15 for converting the planned order to PR for the same MRP controller.
users are block for converting the planned order to PR even if they are clicking the different planned order or material code.
Is it SAP std or whether I am missing something to make it allow to acces the same T code and execute to convert planned order to PR?
Kindly share your knowledge.
regards
DP

Hi DP,
I think this is standard behavior, in order to prevent inconsistencies during collective planned order conversion.
The generated locks can be checked in transaction SM12.
Regards,
Mauro

Similar Messages

Multiple user in a parallel dynamic process step?

Hi,
anyone an idea how to address an process step in an parallel dynamic block simultaneously to multiple users?
I already tried the Assign Users to Process Role-Callable Object. Unfortunately each added user to one step in the parallel dynamic block was added to the same step in each parallel thread.
Any suggestions how to solve this problem in a other way?
Thanks and best regards
Robert

WKAriyoshi wrote:
Is there a way to execute the Prompt User for Input in parallel process while executing the read data part? Is there another way to request a password from the user?
Executing these tasks (reading from instrument AND prompting user for inputs) in parallel loops can solve your problem instantly, if you can share the code, one can pin point what & where exactly changes are required or parallel loop can be included (along with any other changes which might be required).
I am not allergic to Kudos, in fact I love Kudos.
Make your LabVIEW experience more CONVENIENT.

Sharing an iTunes Library across multiple user account and a network.

Sharing an iTunes Music Library across multiple user accounts.
Hello Everybody!
Firstly, this was designed to be run in Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger. It will not work with earlier versions of Mac OS X! Sorry.
Here's a handy tip for keeping your hard drive neat and tidy, it also saves space, what in effect will be done is an iTunes music library will be shared amongst multiple users on the same machine. There are advantages and disadvantages to using this method.
• Firstly I think it might be worthwhile to state the advantages and disadvantages to using this approach.
The advantages include:
- Space will be saved, as no duplicate files will occur.
- The administrator will be able to have complete control over the content of the iTunes library, this may be useful for restricting the content of the Library; particularly for example if computer is being used at and education institution, business or any other sort of institution where things such as explicit content would be less favorable.
- The machine will not be slowed by the fact that every user has lots of files.
The disadvantages to this system include.
- The fact that the account storing the music will have to be logged in, and iTunes will have to be active in that account.
- If the account housing the music is not active then nobody can use the iTunes library.
- There is a certain degree of risk present when an administrator account must be continually active.
- Fast User Switching must be enabled.
Overview:
A central account controls all music on the machine/network, this is achieved by storing iTunes files in a public location as opposed to in the user's directory. In effect the system will give all users across the machine/network access to the same music/files without the possibility of files 'doubling up' because two different users like the same types of music. This approach saves valuable disk space in this regard and may therefore prove to be useful in some situations.
This is a hearty process to undertake, so only follow this tutorial if you're willing to go all the way to the end of it.
Process:
Step 1:
Firstly, we need to organize the host library, I tidied mine up, removing excess playlists, random files, things like that. this will make thing a bit easier in the later stages of this process.
Once the library is tidied up, move the entire "iTunes" folder from your Home directory to the "//localhost" directory (The Macintosh HD) and ensure that files are on the same level as the "Applications", "Users", "Library" and "System" directories; this will ensure that the files in the library are available to all users on the machine (this also works for networks)
Optionally you can set the ownership of the folder to the 'administrator' account (the user who will be hosting the library.), you may also like to set the permissions of 'you can' to "Read & Write" (assuming that you are doing this through the user who will host the library); secondly you should set the "Owner" to the administrator who will be hosting the library and set their "access" to "Read & Write" (this will ensure that the administrator has full access to the folder). The final part of this step involves setting access for the "Others" tab to "Read Only" this will ensure that the other users can view but not modify the contents on the folder.
Overview:
So far we have done the following steps:
1. Organized the host library.
2. Placed the iTunes directory into a 'public' directory so that other users may use it. (this step is essential if you plan on sharing the library across multiple accounts on the same machine. NOTE: this step is only necessary if you are wanting to share you library across multiple accounts on the same machine, if you simply want to share the music across a network, use the iTunes sharing facility.
3. set ownership and permissions for the iTunes music folder.
Step 2:
Currently the administrator is the only user who can use this library, however we will address this soon. In this step we will enable iTunes music sharing in the administrator's account, this will enable other users to access the files in the library.
If you are not logged in as the administrator, do so; secondly, open iTunes and select "Preferences" from the "iTunes" menu, now click the "Sharing" tab, if "share my library on my local network" is not checked, the radio buttons below this will now become active, you may choose to share the entire libraries contents, or share only selected content.
Sharing only selected content may be useful if their is explicit content in the library and minors use the network or machine that the library is connected to.
If you have selected "share entire library" go to Step 3, if you have selected share "share selected playlists" read on.
After clicking "share selected playlists" you must then select the playlists that you intend to share across your accounts and network. Once you have finished selecting the playlists, click "OK" to save the settings.
Overview:
In this step we:
1. Enabled iTunes sharing in the administrator's account, now, users on the local network may access the iTunes library, however, users on the same machine may not.
Step 3:
Now we will enable users on the same machine to access the library on the machine. This is achieved by logging in as each user, opening iTunes, opening iTunes preferences, and clicking "look for shared music". now all users on the machine may also access the library that the administrator controls.
This in effect will mean that the user will not need to use their user library, it will be provided to them via a pseudo network connection.
As a secondary measure, I have chosen to write a generic login script that will move any content from the user's "Music/iTunes/iTunes Music" directory to the trash and then empties the user's trash.
This is done through the use of an Automator Application: this application does the following actions.
1. Uses the "Finder" action "Get Specified Finder Items"
1a. The user's "~/Music/iTunes/iTunes Music" folder
2. Uses the "Finder" action "Get Folder Contents"
3. Uses the "Finder" action "Move to Trash"
4. Uses the "Automator" action "Run AppleScript"
4a. with the following:
on run {input, parameters}
tell application "Finder"
empty trash
end tell
return input
end run
IMPORTANT: Once the script is adapted to the user account it must be set as a login item. in order to keep the script out of the way i have placed it in the user's "Library" directory, in "Application Support" under "iTunes".
Overview:
Here we:
1. Enabled iTunes sharing in the user accounts on the host machine, in effect allowing all users of the machine to view a single iTunes library.
2. (Optional) I have created a login application that will remove any content that has been added to user iTunes libraries, this in effect stops other users of the machine from adding music and files to iTunes.
Step 4:
If it is not already enabled, open system preferences and enable Fast User Switching in Accounts Options.
Summary:
We have shared a single iTunes library across multiple user account, while still allowing for network sharing. This method is designed to save space on machines, particularly those with smaller hard drives.
I hope that this hint proves to be helpful and I hope everybody will give me feedback on my process.
regards,
Pete.
iBook G4; 60GB Hard Drive, 512MB RAM, Airport Extreme Mac OS X (10.4.6) iWork & iLife '06, Adobe CS2, Final Cut Pro. Anything and Everything!!!

how to share music between different accounts on a single computer

Multiple users sharing one itunes library

i have multiple users on my mac, but i'd like us all to be able to access the same itunes library. when i go to itunes prefs on one of the other users accounts and redirect their music library to my folder, it says it is doing it, but itunes still goes to their own music folder instead of mine. i can share my library with the sharing pref, but while they can now listen to my music, they still can't use it in imovie. is there any easy way around this problem??
thanks for your help.

I wrote a simple shell script that executes each time a user logs in (well, actually, each time I log in, coz' it's not really applicable to other users). It syncs my work and home addressbooks and iCal calendars to one another.
I named it "sync". Then I read somewhere that if you wanted to make it double-clickable (to launch it from the Finder), I appended a ".command" filename extension (so it's now named "sync.command"). I also did a chmod 755 to that file so that it had execute privileges. Depending on whether you give each user their own copy of this thing, or keep a single copy in, say, the /Users/Shared directory, you may have to play around with chmod. Whatever, just so long as the user that has just logged in has execute permissions to the file, and to the entire path to the file, you should be good.
Then, in SysPrefs > Accounts > Login Items, I added that "sync.command" file to the list. So, really the only difference is I'm not wrapping mine inside an Automator script like you are.
I had tried adding it to ~/Library/LaunchAgents and make a launchd plist for it, that would kick it off at login. But I didn't get that to work. Don't know why. But just adding the double-clickable executable unix script to the Login Items list did the trick. Whether the plist has to hang out there with it, I don't know. I still have it there, though, in case I ever get motivated to figure out what's wrong with my launchd plist file. So, if just adding it to the Login Items list doesn't do it for you, you could try making a (functional?) launchd plist for it and plopping them both in ~/Library/LaunchAgents, too. That's how I am now, and, like I said, it launches at user login as that user's process (not as a root process like the above referenced article said how login hooks worked -- although, you may want it to run as root since you want this to work with multiple users...in which case, you might want to listen to Cole and not me...).

How to use the same POWL query for multiple users

Hello,
I have defined a POWL query which executes properly. But if I map the same POWL query to 2 portal users and the 2 portal users try to access the same page simultaneously then it gives an error message to one of the users that
"Query 'ABC' is already open in another session."
where 'ABC' is the query name.
Can you please tell me how to use the same POWL query for multiple users ?
A fast reply would be highly appreciated.
Thanks and Regards,
Sandhya

Batch processing usually involves using actions you have recorded. In Action you can insert Path that can be used during processing documents. Path have some size so you may want to only process document that have the same size. Look in the Actions Palette fly-out menu for insert path. It inserts|records the current document work path into the action being worked on and when the action is played it inserts the path into the document as the current work path..

How can I have multiple users on one apple id?

How can I have multiple users on one apple ID?
ie: I have my apple ID with my own credit, how can I set up credit for my son under the same apple ID, so that he can still access the same apps I've already downloaded and paid for?

I've been trying to figure out a clean way to do this too. I think you may need more than one Apple ID – one that is shared and used to purchase "sharable" items and then "individual" Apple IDs for you and your son. That's the idea that I'm pursuing for the moment.
It seems that there must be a way to do this, App Store purchases for the Mac are licensed across multiple machines. iPhone app purchases have "all your devices" licensing. Makes me think that Apple has a process in mind for sharing an account (or associating a device with multiple accounts).
Other things I've learned:
- Apparently you can't merge Apple ID accounts. I asked about this once at an Apple Store and was told that there was no way to do it.
- If you share an Apple ID the Messages app behaves in a somewhat surprising manner. It must use your Apple ID to decide where messages should be sent because all users get all messages. This can make it very hard to organize a surprise party :-)

How can I allow multiple users to edit a single shared iCal calendar?

Is it possible to allow multiple users to edit a single shared iCal calendar? I also want to provide different permissions to those users. Is this possible through .MAC? Is it possible on Mac OSX Server?

I would like 2 agenda synced through .Mac but it does not work.
I have 2 computers and 2 laptops. A very simple agenda with 3 calenders. Myself my partner and the office calender. I want to publish my calender and that of my partner. The office calender I would like to sync so that we can change the office calender at any location.
I set up sync only for iCall and have a .Mac account. When I change anything on any of the calenders in iCall nothing happens on any of my other locations. Even though the locations are registered as synced. I can see the sync wheel turning but at the end of it the calenders are not synced.
At this moment I fully understand the publish and unpublished calenders but have no clue what so ever what syncing does for iCall. There seems to be no functionality to it. It does not transport any calender info over .Mac. There is no visable check to see what is happening and the process of syncing is not transperent. Lots of my friends go to me for advise on Apple issues but as far as sync wether iCall or Addressbook I always tell them sync does not work and I have no clue why others have it working. I haven't met any people here in Holland either that got in working. I suppose with iCall you have to get third party software to share calenders editable calenders. Really hopeless situation, wish Apple would just have a manual stating what sync can do and what it can not. Hours wasted on this issue trying to get it to work.
Hope anyone here can help out.

Can multiple users complete a form on a company server concurrently?

I would like to be able to create forms and distribute them via SharePoint but allow multiple users to complete the forms at the same time. Is this possible or can a form only be completed by a single individual at a time?

How were you planning to submit/process the form data? Most methods would be fine because they do not touch the original, which can have unlimited read-only copies.

ChaRM Allowing Multiple Users in the Same CD to be in Edit Mode

We have upgraded to ChaRM 7.1 but are still using CRMD_ORDER and Transaction Monitor CRM_DNO_MONITOR. When the Developer completes her change, populates the Current Processor with the Change Manager and clicks Save she keeps the CD open in Edit Mode. The Change Manager is able to open the same CD and click Edit without any warning on the bottom of the window saying it is being processed by another user.
When there is a hand off to the next Current Processor, both the previous and current user are able to be in edit mode. I don't recall this being allowed before. Has this changed with 7.1?

DGS wrote:
I have a global temp table (GTT) defined with 'on commit preserve rows'. This table is accessed via a web page using ASP.NET. The application was designed so that every one that accessed the web page could only see their data in the GTT.
We have just realized that the GTT doesn't appear to be empty as new web users use the application. I believe it has something to do with how ASP is connecting to the database. I only see one entry in the V$SESSION view even when multiple users are using the web page. I believe this single V$SESSION entry is causing only one GTT to be available at a time. Each user is inserting into / selecting out of the same GTT and their results are wrong.
I'm the back end Oracle developer at this place and I'm having difficulty translating this issue to the front end ASP team. When this web page is accessed, I need it to start a new session, not reuse an existing session. I want to keep the same connection, but just start a new session... Now I'm losing it.. Like I said, I'm the back end guy and all this web/connection/pooling front end stuff is magic to me.
The GTT isn't going to work unless we get new sessions. How do we do this?
Thanks!You may want to try changing your GTT to 'ON COMMIT DELETE ROWS' and have the .Net app use a transaction object.
We had a similar problem and I found help in the following thread:
Re: Global temp table problem w/ODP?
All the best.

Updating single row by multiple users at the same time

Hi,
I have been asked to develop an application where a single row from a table will be accessed by multiple users. Even multiple users can try to update the same row at the same time. So, to provide a solution of this problem should it be the best way to lock that particular row when user requesting to update it and after completion of commit the lock will be released. In the same time if some other user request to update the same row then it will be in the wait condition.
Please provide suggestion that is it the best way to handle the situation or not. If it is then can you also please provide an example (with sample code) of it.
Regards,
Koushik

It depends entirely on how the system was built.
You could relatively easily build an application that does something like
- Select a row with as last_updated_date column
- Update the row specifying the last_updated_date you had selected in your WHERE clause
- If the update updates 1 row, it was successful, otherwise inform the user that the row was already updated.
In this case, the second user would get an error indicating that the seat had already been purchased.
You could also relatively easily do a SELECT FOR UPDATE to prevent users from ever getting an error between the time they select a seat and the time they finish their transaction. Of course, if the user wanders away from the computer, or inadvertently ends up locking dozens of rows, this tends to rather problematic in practice. You may find that when the train pulls out of the station, someone that never ended up buying a ticket has locked a dozen rows so you lost a dozen sales. If you have a call center where operators are reserving seats for people on the phone, you may decide that explicit locking is more appropriate because you're confident that the operators aren't going to leave tickets locked for long periods of time and the cost of having the customer walked through the seat selection process multiple times would be higher than the cost of having rows locked longer than they need to be.
Justin

How to prevent multiple users from updating the same data in coherence

Hi,
I have a Java Web Application and for data cache am using coherence 3.5. The same data maybe shared by multiple users which maybe in hundreds. Now how do I prevent multiple users from updating the same data in coherence i.e. is there something in coherence that will only allow one user a time to update. If one user is in a process of updating a data in coherence and some other user also tries to update then the second user should get an error.
Thanks

I have a question on the same line. How can I restrict someone from updating a cache value when I a process is already working on it. I tried locking the cache key but it does not stop other process to update it , it only does not allow other process to get lock on it.

Triggering a sub work flow for multiple users at same time.

I have a scenario in which I have created sub workflow as an activity for approval process. This sub work flow should be triggered for multiple users at the same time and their decison is independent of each other.
This is like creating multipe instance of the same sub work flow and then the sub work flow runs indepedently as a new work flow for each of the approver and the process is completeded for approver independently.
How can this be achieved?

Tyr to do like this,
1. First include the subworkflow in the main workflow template.
2. Now include standard Block Step in the main workflow template.
3. In the block select the block type as ParForEach.
4. Before doing the 3rd point make sure that all the agents for whom you want whom you want to initiate the workflow, populate them in a Multiline conatiner element.
5. Once completing 3rd and 4th points open the block step under the tab ParallelProcessing assign the multiline container element name in the for e;g if the multi line container element name is COSTCENTER then do the binding like below. the conatiner element COSTCENTERLINE is created by default once you include the multi line conatiner element under parller processing tab.
&COSTCENTER[&_WF_PARFOREACH_INDEX&]& --------> &_COSTCENTER_LINE&
Now assign the agent of the subworkflow as COSTCENTERLINE , imean if suppose you have 3 entries in the internal table then three separate and for three different agents the workflow is instantiated.

Prevent multiple users from updating coherence cache data at the same time

Hi,
I have a web application which have a huge amount of data instead of storing the data in Http Session are storing it in coherence. Now multiple groups of users can use or update the same data in coherence. There are 100's of groups with several thousand users in each group. How do I prevent multiple users from updating the cache data. Here is the scenario. User logs-in checks in coherence if the data there and gets it from coherence and displays it on the ui if not get it from backend i.e. mainframe systems and store it in coherence before displaying it on the screen. Now some other user at the same time can also perform the same function and if don't find the data in coherence can get it from backend and start saving it in coherence while the other user is also in the process of saving or updating. How do I prevent this in coherence. As have to use the same key when storing in coherence because the same data is shared across users and don't want to keep multiple copies of the same data. Is there something coherence provides out-of-the-box or what is best approach to handle this scenario.
Thanks

Hi,
actually I believe, that if we are speaking about multiple users each with its own HttpSession, in case of two users accessing the same session attribute in their own session, the actually used cache keys will not be the same.
On the other hand, this is probably not what you would really like, you would possibly like to share that data among sessions.
You should probably consider using either read-through caching with the CacheLoader implementor doing the expensive data retrieval (if the data to be cached can be obtained outside of an HTTP container), or side caching with using Coherence locks or entry-processors for concurrency control on the data retrieval operations for the same key (take care of retries in this case).
Best regards,
Robert

Is it possible to give multiple users the same email account using different individual user ids/passwords (iMS 5.1)?

Hence, a manager could let one or more assistants access the manager's email. Also one could set up a group email account and multiple users with different id/passwords could process/manage the account.

Yes, look in the admin guide for the shared folders section. This in essence allows you to delegate permissions of individual mail folders to other users.
The functionality is being enhanced for iMS 5.2 due out shortly according to iPlanet.

Using of one transaction by multiple users simultaneously

Dear Cons
We have one P.O number. we want to do Migo with reference to that P.o by three users simultaneously. During simultaneously use by multiple users the system gives a message that this p.o is currently used by other user, how can we solve this problem.
example- the p.o contains 50000 mt material ( coal). The material is carried out by trucks into the gate. the users are using T-code- MIGO truckwise. in order to speed up the process as there are lot of trucks carrying material by multiple users the system is not processing data under one p.o.
regards,
nrk

Hi,
Alternative you can think of is not to do GR against PO directly, but first create inbound delivery for each of the physical shipments/trucks.
Then you can do GR against each inbound delivery separately.
Regards,
Dominik Modrzejewski

Multiple user processing in MD15

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for