GRC AC 10 - Access Request error

[Former Member]

Hi,

We are in the middle of upgrading to GRC AC 10. Our Role Approval workflow was working last week and now this week, we get this hard error upon request submission:

"Error inserting records"

Has anyone ever encountered this error? I cannot find anything on SAP Notes or this site.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

thanks,

-john

[kevin_tucholke1 · Accepted solution]

John:

I have seent this on the Access Request before, but not on the Role Approval request.  This has meant for me that the same request number (for the same process ID) is trying to be used by the system, but since this is on the Role Approval, the number is system generated.

You might try looking into the SLG1 Application Log to see if there are any insights.

Sorry could not be of more help.

Thanks

Kevin Tucholke

[santosh_krishnan2 · Accepted solution]

Hi Kevin,

I'm having a similar issue but my circumstances are a little different.  As described above, the Access Requests is throwing the above error, but only in our QA system.  Our DEV system works 100%.  I've already gone through to confirm that all the configuration is correct, and identical in QA and DEV, including the user authorizations being used for the RFCs etc.

SAP recommended that 1839908 be applied, which we did, and when we transported the correction to our QA system, we noted improvements, but not a total fix.

Now what's happening is that certain roles being requested by a user will generate a request successfully.  However certain roles will generate the above message.

For those roles that generate the above request, I've verified that there is a valid role owner assigned, and a valid approver.  I've also verified that the owner/approver exists in the appropriate ECC system.

At this point, I'm unable to figure out why some roles are giving the above error while other roles are not.

Do you have any ideas?

Thanks,

Santosh

[mark_wilson8]

Hello,

Is this a large request, we had this error and discovered that a request is restricted to 300 line entries, if it exceeds this, as can happen if you are creating a user in multiple clients / systems, you will get the error. Do you have anything in SLG1?

Regards

Mark

[Former Member]

Hi Stephan,

Check the below:

1) SPRO --> Governance, Risk and Compliance --> Access Control -->User Provisioning --> Maintain Number Range Intervals for Provisioning Requests

please see have you maintained the above.

[Former Member]

Hi John,

Kindly implement the sap note-1739707.

First implement the note 1690974 and then note 1739707.

The problem woud be rectified.

Best Regards,

Nandita

[Former Member]

Hi Nandita,

I had the same issue and looked into the SAP Notes but it didn't help.

I looked closer and issue was with the Workflow. The request to be submitted was not picking any workflow.

Regards,

Rajesh

[former_member395983]

Hi Rajesh,

How did you assign the workflow? How to check the workflow? I'm adding a new system and need to attach the system to a workflow. How?

Thank you in advance.

Regards,

Jenilyn

[Former Member]

Hi john,

  Please check the link below.

http://www.stechno.net/sap-notes.html?view=sapnote&id=1609672

Thanks,

Varun jain

[Former Member]

Hi John,

After applied the new support package release 10 , my GRC system starts to show me this message. Please, tell me how u fixed this error.

Thanks,

Eliane

[Former Member]

I have seen the error before also, but not in the context of the User Groups being added (as mentioned in the SAP note above). As a workaround, we would just recreate the request again and find it did not face that problem second time round.

If anyone has an idea of what causes this issue in general,I would be happy to hear more about it.

[Former Member]

Hi John,

Can you please check if in one of the tabs while submission, some rows are coming as selected or highlighted even though there are no records in the selection table. If yes, then try to delete the same using remove button?

May be this helps as one of the customer faced the same scenario.

Best Regards,

Smriti

[saksham]

Hi John,

Kindly check the note 1635547.

Regards,

Saksham