cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

BRF+ for bulk User Creation with no agent approval

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Team,

i looking forward to creation of new BRF+ rulset for Multiple User creation through Access Request.that is a new BRF+ ruleset when ever we choose 'Multiple' as option for 'Request for' option in Access Request.When ever we choose Multiple the request schould need to be routed to a different workflow where no agent approval required and Users need to be created with the choosen role in the Access Request. Please find the attachment - Request Details.

In one of the SDN blog , i found the comment for Bulk User Creation  - "Do a DB lookup in BRF plus for the table GRACREQ. You can pinpoint the   record using REQNO in the BRF+ header structure and the REQNO column in the   GRACREQ table. Once you have picked the right record look at the column   REQUEST_FOR in this table".

I created a DB lookup , with the attached View SQL Staement. ( Attachement attached). When ever i give the Request Number as Input, i get the output as Request Numaber & Request For type as Multiple.

I Used the Newly created DB lookup in Decision Table ( Attachment attached ) . with the output trigger values as 'z_multiple_user_path' which the request need to be routed if it satisifed the DB lookup output. When doing simulation, Input we provide (Request Number and request type) iam not fetching any output ( Line item and trigger value) are empty.

Please let me know where iam doing wrong.

Also please guide me in case we have any different option of creating Multiple Users Access Request without any approvals. At the end Users need to be created with the choosen Role in the Access Request.

Thank you.

Regards

Chiranjeevi

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (4)

Answers (4)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Team,

Please assist in my requirement.

Already defined a BRF+ Workflow which was existing for the Process ID : SAP_GRAC_ACCESS_Request with Rule id : 52724D3BB1021ED484E79CC1B9710AF3 -  for Single Users \Change Account etc . This was working Perfectly.

Yesterday Created a New Rule Id : BA4556B68E0A1ED592DFDE6F4C4819F6 - Multiple User Rule ID. But for this in MSMP i always need to change the Maintain Rules stage in MSMP Workflow. Which inherits provides me to maintain only one BRF+ Rule id at a time.

My Requirement : When i choose Single Users\Chnage Account - Worklfow shcould calculate Rule id : 52724D3BB1021ED484E79CC1B9710AF3 -  & when i choose Multiple Users at Request for in Access Request form it has to choose the Rule id : BA4556B68E0A1ED592DFDE6F4C4819F6

Please let me know how to acheive this.

Thanks

former_member193066
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

you can achive your requirement .

by sending request in particular path as per your need, but not chaging BRF+ at initiator,

as said you can have only 1 initiator

Regards,

Prasant

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi ,

Now able to flow with a Different Workflow path.Able to create Bulk users and assign roles with no agent approval. Thank you.

But basically our requirement is to :

For Request For : Single : it has to consider the Old Rule id (52724D3BB1021ED484E79CC1B9710AF3 - Single Users Rule Id)which was existing in the MSMP Workflow.

For Request for : Multiple . it has to consider the new BRF+   Rule  ( BA4556B68E0A1ED592DFDE6F4C4819F6 - Multiple User Rule ID )which i created above and absoultely working fine.

Now my requirment is, when ever we choose the Request For Single - it has to choose the Rule ID :52724D3BB1021ED484E79CC1B9710AF3  without changing the Process Global Settings which is now marked to Multiple User Bulk Rule Id as below .

Thank you.

former_member193066
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hello ,

There will be only 1 process initiator per process id.

hence you cannot use multiple.

This is actually a benefit, since you can use all the logic and only create 1 initiator rule.

what you can do is, put all you condition parameter in 1 rule and map that in process global initiator

REgards,

Prasant

former_member193066
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

You BRF decision is wrong.

you should run DB lookup on table GRACREQ and get the value for table request for .

Line item key should always be item number slected from context parameter.

attached in screenshot Decision table for you.

Regards,

Prasant

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thank You Prasant.

I have modified my DB lookup and getting the required results.I input the request No. and i get the output as Request For 'M' when i simulate and stores the values in element Request for. Attachement DB Lookup1.

I modified the Decision Table as suggested by you. I input values Line Item (blank), Request type-001 and Request For as 'M', i get the correct trigger value as the output. Atatchment Decision table1.

When i simulate my Function in BRF+,  i do not get any Output for my trigger value. I have inserted the Element - Request for under the Context Area- Signature.Attached attachment Function 1.

Please let me know where iam doing mistake.

Thank you.

Regards

Chiranjeevi

former_member193066
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

can you please check any existing request which is submitted for multiple request and submit and paste simulation details.

REgards,

Prasant

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Prasant,

After all the new modifications, i tried to activate the MSMP Worklfow itself.

Iam getting the below error , when trying to activate the MSMP Workflow :

Please suggest.

Thanks

Chiranjeevi

former_member193066
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

whats the process type you have selected while creating the BRF+?

Regards,

Prasant

former_member193066
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Please upload this.

and modify as per your requirement

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

could you provide the name of your DBlookup. This name should appear as input column in your decision table.

I do not think your DBLookup name is RequestFor, as is shown in your decision table

Regards

Plaban

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Prasant,

Process ID : SAP_GRAC_ACCESS_REQUEST

And iam sorry. I do not know how to uplad the XML file which you sent. Please guide and let me know about my Mistake.

Thanks

Chiranjeevi

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Plaban,

My DB Lookup Name is DB Lookup.

Now i have removed the coloumn 'Request For' and inserted 'DB lookup' in the decision table.

Thanks

Chiranjeevi

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Prasant,

I do not have option Tools --->XML Export\Import.

I have only option Tools ---> Simulation.

Thanks

former_member193066
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

change view to expert mode you will see xml import and export .

Regards,

Prasant

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

could you now try simulation, for any existing request or create a new request, and run simulation

Regards

plaban

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi ,

Now able to flow with a Different Workflow path.Able to create Bulk users and assign roles with no agent approval. Thank you.

But basically our requirement is to :

For Request For : Single : it has to consider the Old Rule id (52724D3BB1021ED484E79CC1B9710AF3 - Single Users Rule Id)which was existing in the MSMP Workflow.

For Request for : Multiple . it has to consider the new BRF+   Rule  ( BA4556B68E0A1ED592DFDE6F4C4819F6 - Multiple User Rule ID )which i created above and absoultely working fine.

Now my requirment is, when ever we choose the Request For Single - it has to choose the Rule ID :52724D3BB1021ED484E79CC1B9710AF3  without changing the Process Global Settings which is now marked to Multiple User Bulk Rule Id as below .

Thank you.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Chiranjeevi,

The requirement is "Multiple" users request should  take a different path with no approval.

Can the below work.,

  • Create request type "Multiple"
  • Modify existing initiator to have the new request type and generate the result
  • In MSMP create path for this result with no stages meaning auto approved.

Will this work. Thanks

Note : We have done similar during our go-live, for mass user ID creation.

Regards,

Muthu

Former Member
0 Kudos

Team,

Please help me out, incase i need to create a new BRF+ and new workflow path, not disturbing the exisitng workflow.

Thanks