Rule generator adapter

hi,
Please explain me whats the use of rule generator adapter where entity adapter and prepopulate adapter does all the functions of a rule generator.
i have gone through the docs but it doesnt explain the difference.
Thanks in advance,
Cat's Paw

You are correct in stating the functionality of the oim adapter types is overlapping. The documentation describes the recommended classification types of the adapters while you can achieve the same functionality by creating some other adapter type in similar fashion.
I would suggest you to use the recommended approach as mentioned in the documentation.

Similar Messages

  • Problem in rule generator adapter

    Hi *,
    Here i've got one problem while creating rule generator adapter to validate my customized field, the class referred by the adapter is simple, which requires a minimum length of the field is 6, however, I have no idea about how to tell Xellerate whether the validation is success or not, going through the OIM documents without luck,should i return some specific value that Xellerate understands or throw some kind of exception? please help me!
    Thanks,
    R.
    Thurm

    Hi gaurav,
    It was a good response from your side.
    I have gone through the FAQ but could not able to find anything.
    Can you please help me out in this regard ?
    Also i am using select query of this kind,
    SELECT
    SEFVHRC.VHRBRCD,SEFVHRC.VHRCUCD,SEFVHRC.VHRVIN,SEFVHRC.VHRMOCD,SEFVHRC.VHRCHAS,
    SEFVHRC.VHRSLOR,SEFVHRC.VHRDIVI,SEFVHRC.VHRMGCD,SEFVHRC.VHRMOCH,SEFVHRC.VHRVHTY,
    SEFVHRC.VHRBDTY,SEFVHRC.VHRMFYR,SEFVHRC.VHRMOYR,SEFVHRC.VHRMODS,
    SEFVHRC.VHRMDTL,SEFVHRC.VHRCLBR,SEFVHRC.VHRRCID,SEFVHRC.VHRARDT,
    SEFVHRC.VHRLUTM,SEFVHRC.VHRLUDT,SEFVHRC.VHRKEYN,SEFVHRC.VHRCTORN,
    SEFVHRC.VHRCTIMP,SEFVHRC.VHRPRDT,SEFVHRC.VHRPRDT,SEFVHRC.VHRRCDT,
    SEFVHFT.VHFCLCD,SEFVHFT.VHFCAT,SEFVHFT.VHFCADSC,SEFVHFT.VHFKEY,SEFVHFT.VHFTEXT1,
    SEFVHFT.VHFTEXT2,SEFVHFT.VHFTEXT3,SEFVHFT.VHFTEXT4
    FROM
    SAPTESTLIB.SEFVHRC,SAPTESTLIB.SEFVHFT
    WHERE
    SEFVHRC.VHRVIN = SEFVHFT.VHFVIN AND SEFVHRC.VHRSTTS = ' '
    and update query of this kind,
    Update SEFVHRC SET VHRSTTS = 'R' WHERE VHRSTTS = ' '
    I am using prity big select query. is there any option to optimize it?
    Can you please help me out in solving this problem
    urs,
    Soorya

  • Rule-Generator Adapter is not being triggered

    I have created a rule-generator adapter and assigned it to pre-insert and pre-update of a process form (mapped the return value to process form field) but the system does not trigger the adapter when I add the resource to user. Any ideas why this happens?
    Regards,
    Kostas

    I tried with an entity adapter but the effect is the same (restarted the server). It looks like the system does trigger the pre-insert and pre-update events. Any ideas?

  • Populating a field using rule generator adapter

    Hi
    How a form field is populated using Rule Generator Adapter. And what we should do if we want the same field do not appear in the form, though it's value should be participate in task(create user update user etc).
    Thanks
    Kanchan

    Check these links
    http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E10391_01/doc.910/e10366/rules.htm
    Prepopulate Adapter and Rule Generator Adapter

  • Prepopulate Adapter and Rule Generator Adapter

    Can anyone tell me the exact difference between Prepopulate adapter and Rule generator adapter? I have read the documentation but both seems to be same.
    Please explain me with an example scenario..
    Regards
    Pavan

    Hi,
    See if this help you in gaining more understanding.
    PrePopulate Adapter: They are mapped with the fields of process form and are used to prepopulate the fields value during the resource provisioning.
    RG Adapter: A RG Adapter incoporates business rules to the fields of either OIM user form or user defined form so that these fields can be automatically populated
    and saved to the database. You can use the RG & Entity Adapter to construct the userid from the firstname and lastname fields and prepopulate it.
    Difference:
    While both these adapter can be used to prepopulate values but RG Adapter has one to one mapping with the RG adapter and custom field. An RG Adapter once
    attached to a field cannot be attached with another field thus preventing adapter reuse. Beside this, no other type of adapter can be associated with that custom
    field.In contrast, the PrePopulate adapter can be reused and attached with multiple fields.
    Hope this will help you.
    Regards
    Sunny Ajmera

  • Rule-generated messages on GWIA - Allow replies

    Last year on Friday before the week of July 4, we had a user create a vacation rule and she checked "Reply to External Users." She had listed her work email at her apartment complex. Right after she left work that day, her apartment complex emailed her saying the office would be closed for the week of the 4th. Her rule replied that she was on vacation, the apartment complex replied the office would be closed... and you get the picture. When she got back, she had received 80,000 emails and had sent 80,000 emails. We turned off "Allow replies" on Rule-generate message but now some would like it turned back on. Is there a way to prevent a loop such as this? If so - how? Thanks! Susan

    * susan1525,
    not really. If you allow replies to the internet and a user creates a silly rule including "subject contains *", this may happen again. If the rule doesn't contain that statement, the reply rule should fire only once per sender until disabled and enabled again.
    I allow rule generated messages to the internet to very few users for that reason.
    Uwe
    Novell Knowledge Partner (NKP)
    Please don't send me support related e-mail unless I ask you to do so.

  • Prevent rule-generated messages to certain host

    Hi,
    maybe someone has an good idea for our challenge.
    We want to suppress the rule-generated messages from GroupWise but not depending on who sends it, but on who receives it.
    Why?
    Because we are on the way to enable Vibe Email reception but we don't want the vacation messages to be sent to Vibe (different internal domain, so the mails will pass GWIA and there be routed via route.cfg to the vibe server).
    All thought / ideas are appreciated.
    Thanks
    Mathias

    Hi Mathias,
    Gosh - using Class of Service never even occurred to me! Pity that it's not flexible enough for your needs
    Indeed, enhancement request time: http://www.novell.com/rms
    Cheers,

  • Rule Generated vacation messgae timeout question

    Hello all,
    We have a user that wants to set up a Vacation Rule that will send the "Vacation Message" once a day to every user.
    Currently, GroupWise 802 seems to generate the Vacation Message only once per user, until the rule goes away.
    I cannot determine a time out. It is longer than one week.
    So, the complaint is, remote users do not know or remember that she is out of the office if they do not receive
    consistent "Vacation Messages", at least once per week, but ideally, once per day.
    I cannot find this setting or "feature" documented anywhere.
    (It looks like version 7 added this feature to not reply to Every message)
    I rather not open a case with Novell over this, but our user is very insistent.
    Thanks all,
    Brian

    Add Subject contains * to the rule conditions, that should force a reply
    to every message.
    Cheers Dave
    Dave Parkes [NSCS]
    Occasionally resident at http://support-forums.novell.com/

  • Load rules generate by Essbase Studio

    I'm using Essbase Studio to create dimension build load rules in Essbase. When the dimension load rules are created in Essbase, does it use the ODBC connection in the Essbase server or in Essbase Studio?

    It depends on if you are using streaming or non-streaming mode. If streaming mode then it has to be on the Essbase server if non-streaming mode then it goes through the Studio server

  • 'Allow rule generated messages' on two user account mailbox

    Vacation mail activite error can't auto reply to external user.
    Anyone saw it before?
    Thanks.

    Within the GWIA on a GW802 system there are access controls on
    Auto-forward and auto-reply and I would suggest that this user is in a
    GWIA user profile that is not allowed to auto-reply?
    T
    On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 03:16:01 GMT, hoiyi88
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >Vacation mail activite error can't auto reply to external user.
    >Anyone saw it before?
    >Thanks.

  • Mapping Adapter Variables form: OIM 11g

    I have created a Rule Generator adaptor. Which Form should I attach this adapter to if I want it to process the Xellerate users?
    I tried using the Users form, the Users.User Defined Tasks, Data Object Manager form and a few others. I don't see the option to Map the variables to values from the User Definition fields (i.e. User Login, User Key etc.) in any of these forms. The only options available are Literal or Entity Field.

    I see a form called Event Handler Manager...is that the one? When I include my adapter in there for this form, I still see the same options (Literal or Entity Field).
    My Rule Generator adapter is checking if a user being created or updated is a manager. (So if his USR_KEY exists as USR_MANAGER_KEY in the db). The Variable USR_KEY is set to Resolve as Runtime. I just need to map it in the right form.
    In the older versions of OIM I could simply map this in the Users form. Don't see that option in 11g.
    Any suggestions?

  • My Proxy: How to implement a validation before insert/update

    Hi,
    In my env, the OIM User has an attribute called Employee Grade. When the user is configuring My Proxy, he/she can select users who grade who has grade equals or higher... I created a Rule Generator adapter and I tried to assign it to the Pre-Insert of Users.Proxy data object. Problem: There is no field availabe for this entity and I thought it was related to the table PXD (PXD_ORIG_USR_KEY and PXD_PROXY_KEY).
    If I could access those fields, I would search the proxy user by PXD_PROXY_KEY and get he/she grade. After that, compare with the grade of the original user.
    I alse have to iimplement the same logic when the user reasign a task to another user.
    Have you ever implemented that or have any idea?
    Thanks,
    Renato Guimaraes.
    Edited by: Renato.Guimaraes on 05/10/2009 13:58 - Implement the same logic to reassign task

    One option is to implement the proxy funtion as a separate RO. Makes it possible to do validation in the approval process but will force you to manually implement any functionality that you would like to have associated with the function.
    Probably not easier than a GUI customization but I wanted to mention the option.
    Best regards
    /Martin

  • GRC 10.0 SP14 - Poblems when generating rules for logical systems

    Hello Experts!
    We recently updated a DEV system to SP14 and we're having issues regarding the rule set generation. I'd like to know if you have faced a similar problem after installing SP14. The details are described below:
    Create a test function ZTEST_F1
    The action PFCG is associated to a Physical System (Test Connector SP14) and to a Logical System (Sistema Logico Retail)
    The logical system contains D05 among other connectors:
    And it’s defined as a logical group:
    The connector “test connector Sp14” points to the same system as D05.
    Now I create another function, let’s say ZTEST_F2
    Now let’s define a SoD Risk ZTSTSP14
    Generate rules and after that we check GRACSYSRULE table for such risk and we get:
    Let’s add more transactions:
    Generate rules:
    Now in the table we get:
    The logical system has been added to the GRACSYSRULE table for the new combination and also the physical system TST_D05, but there's no combinations for the system D05 for example.
    Now if we run SoD analysis:
    We have four combinations for the physical system TST_D05 but only two for D05 that belongs to the logical system:
    Do you have any clue? have you faced a similar problem?
    Thanks in advance.
    Cheers,
    Diego.

    Hello Collen!
    First of all I want to thank you because after aplying the note the rules generated fine and now the Risk Analysis is OK for the example described above:
    I've also tested with a huge number of risks and made a comparison between the results of the Physical conector and the Connector that belongs to a logical group and I got the same results as action level as well as Permission Level as expected.
    Regarding the note itself, we usually check for notes and we have implemented many notes in advance related to rule generation issues.
    The point is that, as my point of view is just not acceptable to get a new SP with this kind of issue. Rule generation is a core functionality and SAP must test such functionalities before releasing a SP and these checks cannot rely on the customer. For me, rule generation issues in GRC are just unnaceptable. I can accept issues with other modules or new functionalities, but with role generation they must guarantee that it works properly and perform the requiered tests before releasing an SP.
    Well... bottom line the issue has been resolved and I really appreciate the help you provided!!!!
    Many Thanks!!!
    Diego.

  • Failed to generate Alert for JMS Sender adapter

    Hi Folks,
                  My scenario is JMS to IDOC..
    I have configured the Alert rules and the alerts are working fine for the Integration engine errors.. and apart from the alert rule there is one more alert rule configured for capturing the alerts of the adapter engine..
    When i provide the queue name as invalid one .. i am able to receive the alerts for the same via alert rule of adapter engine..
    When I force to make the channel to error with the invalid headers of RFH2 (with correct queuename) the channel status is showing error ..but interestingly no alert for the same...
    Now My question here is how to test the generation of  the alerts by forcing the JMS sender channel to error. ? 
    I already checked the report SXMSALERT_LOGREADER for verification but no luck..
    Can some one throw light on this?
    Forgot to mention i am using IBM MQ ...
    Regards
    Rajesh
    Edited by: Rajesh on Jul 8, 2010 10:08 AM

    Hi Raj,
             Thanks for your reply...I am fetching the RFH headers using UDF via Dynamic config only..
    Apart from the configurations errors mentioned for alerts(as i am success in this case)...I am testing if there any data related errors like wrong RFH Headers for JMS sender adapter though the channels showing error status in this case ...but its not throwing the alerts...
    I want to know whether the alert will be triggered for this or not...if not why ..as it should..
    if yes i am unable to get.. what troubleshooting can be done for this...
    if you have any other cases (aprt from config issues)for alert trigger...and also apart from RFH headers case..can u pls share..so that i will try the same..
    MY only question here is why the adapter not trigering the alerts when wrong RFH Headers are sent along the message..but showing the channel status as red..(is it a bug ?)
    Thanks in Advance
    Rajesh

  • How can we know that the Rule is Generated or Not?

    Hi,,
    After creating the Risk , its suggested to click on Generate Rules Button to Generate the Risk.
    But my question is that how we can know whether the risk is already generated or not..??
    Any table or any change history for this.
    As I can see even after generating the Rule the last update date for the risk is still the same.
    Someone please help me !

    Hi,
    Rule ID numbers are just identifiers for different combinations in same risk. It is just serial number assigned to the combination.
    Example:
    Risk: RISK01
    Function: FUNC01                         Function: FUNC02
    Action:      ZU01                              Action:     XU01
                     ZU02                                              XU02
    Rule ID: 0001 for ZU01 and XU01
    Rule ID: 0002 for ZU01 and XU02
    Rule ID: 0003 for ZU02 and XU01
    Rule ID: 0004 for ZU02 and XU02
    But if you remove action ZU02 and XU01 in your update
    Remaining
    Action:
    ZU01                        
    Action:
    XU02
    Rule ID: 0001 for ZU01 and XU02
    So it will just update the respective risk with same rule id assignment to new combination.
    To achieve more clarity try to build one risk in you system.
    You can definitely go into the risk to see if the new rule generated has changes reflected as per update or not. Try this all with example so you would have clarity.
    BR,
    Mangesh

Maybe you are looking for