need help with scenario BPM Http-RFC Sync/async bridge

[Former Member]

hi all!

i've got the following scenario: HTTP-BPM(XI)-RFC synchronous both of them. for that, i'm using S/A bridge in the BPM, but i'm getting the error 'Timeout condition of pipeline reached'. i think the problem is that the process gets lost in the sync/async communication, because in the trace level shows CL_XMS_PLSRV_CALL_BPE-ENTER_PLSRV" and after that every message are 'wait time starting'.

don't know the reason of the error. Maybe I missed something to configure?

the BPM is like this:

Receiver(Open Sync/Async bridge) -> Transformation (mapping from http request to RFC request) -> SyncSend (RFC request and response) -> Transformation (mapping from rfc response to http response) -> Send (Close S/A Bridge)

the IR is configured like this:

Message Types u2013 External Definitions u2013 Imported Objects

mt_cxml_request -> contains xsd of xcml request template.

mt_cxml_response -> contains xsd of xcml response template.

zintegracion_pedidos -> imported RFC from R/3

zintegracion_pedidos.response -> imported RFC from R/3

Message Interfaces

mi_cxml_request_async_abs

mi_cxml_request_sync_abs

mi_cxml_request_sync_out

mi_xcml_response_async

mi_rfc_request_asyn_abs

mi_rfc_request_sync_abs

mi_rfc_request_sync_in

mi_rfc_response_async_abs

Message Mappings

mm_cxml_request_to_rfc_request -> mapping from http request (cxml) to rfc request.

mm_rfc_response_to_cxml_response -> mapping from rfc response to http response (cxml).

Interface Mappings

im_cxml_request_async_abs_to_rfc_request_async_abs

im_rfc_response_async_abs_to_cxml_response_async_abs

and the ID is configured like this:

Business system DES -> created business system for RFC adapter with interface mi_rfc_request_sync_in as receiver. Comunication channel u2018RFC Receiveru2019

Businnes service VW -> created businnes service for HTTP adapter with interface mi_cxml_request_sync_out as sender. Comunication channel u2018HTTP Senderu2019

Receiver Determination

two receiver determinations. One for BPM and the other one for RFC(R/3):

|VW| mi_cxml_request_sync_out:

|BPM_PO| mi_rfc_request_sync_abs:

Interface Determination

two interface determinations:

|VW| mi_cxml_request_sync_out | | BPM_PO:

|BPM_PO| mi_rfc_request_sync_abs | * | * :

Sender Agreement

VW

mi_cxml_request_sync_out

Receiver Agreement

|BPM_PO| |DES| mi_rfc_request_sync_in

[mf_haq]

Hi Fabian,

Just now i saw your threat on SDN,its seems very nice at the same time complex aswell.

1.The errors is related to BPE once check with PI Admin's (its unale to process the Msg's),

"CL_XMS_PLSRV_CALL_BPE-ENTER_PLSRV" its a system level error not application level.

2.change your pooling intervals (incase size may too large)

3.check your sender aswell as receiver config's aswell.(bcoz your structure is standard not custom)

with rgds,

MFH

[Former Member]

hi all,

i've removed the transformations from the BPM, and i've created:

in IR:

- interface mapping: im_xcml_request_to_rfc_request_sync_abs

source interface: mi_cxml_request-sync_abs

target interface: mi_rfc_request_sync_abs

in ID:

- receiver determination: |VW| mi_cxml_request_sync_abs

sender service: VW

interface: mi_cxml_request_sync_abs

receiver: DES

interface mapping:im_xcml_request_to_rfc_request_sync_abs

- interface determination: |VW| mi_cxml_erquest_sync_abs ||

sender service: VW

interface: mi_cxml_request_sync_abs

inbound interface: mi_rfc_request_sync_abs

interface mapping: im_xcml_request_to_rfc_request_sync_abs

- receiver agreement: |VW| |DES| mi_rfc_request_sync_abs

sender service: VW

receiver service: DES

receiver interface: mi_rfc_request_sync_abs

not sure these are the steps i had to do for mapping xml to rfc. but the result is the same error as before, the timeout.

i couldn't test with RTW because i'm getting an error 401 unauthorized.

i'd do it without BPM but the issue is that i wanted to add another step that would be to send the response from rfc to mail too once i got this BPM running. i mean, the response from RFC would be sent to http response and mail both.

the only way i can imagine to do it is with BPM but i'm really fed up with it.

thank u very much folks

[Former Member]

Hi Fabin,

Have you created two receiver determinations(One for BPM other for receiver) and two interface determinations?

Regards,

Senthil.

[Former Member]

Hi Senthil,

yes i created two receiver determinations. One for BPM and another one for the receiver RFC

Regards, Fabian

[Former Member]

Finally I got the solution after a lot of tests. I did it without transfoms and the timeout was due to errors in the ID related to receiver determinations. Thank u very much to all of you for your help

[udo_martens]

Hi Fabian,

this is - without access- of course not easy to analyze. May be the synchr request gets no response, try to isolate it by sending the synchr send step from RTW test tool. Do you get a response? Does it look like expected? Is the XML response valid to the message type used in BPM container for response?

Regards,

Udo

[Former Member]

Hi Nathan and Martens both of you,

Nathan, sorry but the link you gave me doesn't seem to work. it doesn't take me to any post. besides that, you tell me not to put transformations, but I thought I needed it for mapping cxml to the RFC for the request and also for response.

Udo, could you tell me where can I find that test tool? is any transaction?

Thank you very much for your help.

Fabian.

[udo_martens]

Hi Fabian,

>Udo, could you tell me where can I find that test tool? is any transaction?

Yes, Udo is my first name, thank you.

Runtime Workbench / Component Monitoring / Integration Engine / Test Message

Regards,

Udo

[Former Member]

Hi Fabian,

Sorry for not giving the proper link. The below link is the correct one.

If we are not using any 1:N, N:1 mappings, i dont think we require the transformation step. Specify the mappings in interface determination itself.

Thanks & Regards,

Senthil

[Former Member]

Hi Fabian,

Please go through the below thread. It will give you some useful information.

(See Michal's Reply..)

The transformation step is a time consuming one. In your case you have used two transformation steps, so obviously it will take more time. Try to avoid those transformtion steps in your integration process. The more steps you put between the sync-async bridge more time it will take to process.

Even if you increase the waiting time for sync-async bridge, its not sure that it will not give time out errors.

Thanks & Regards,

Senthil.