Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Inconsistent Information in F01131

  1. #1

    Inconsistent Information in F01131

    When a UBE completes status messages are inserted into F01131.

    We have found cases where the same UBE will write completely different information to the file.

    In the second way the records are written, ZZTSV and ZZTMPI do not have values so there is no way to determine if the UBE worked or not.

    What could cause this type of thing to happen. It is not isolated to 1 UBE it seems that it can happen for anyone that is run.

  2. #2
    Member ONYX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Melbourne, AU
    Hello billcros,
    Please have a look at this document this looks very similar to what you are experiencing
    Oracle Support Document 2141612.1 (E1: WRKFLW: Workflow and UBE Messages Received without Any Text in Message Body in P012503 WorkCenter Application or Emails) can be found at:

    Additionally, you'd receive "Job has completed" message in the Work Center for completed UBEs.

  3. #3
    Unfortunately this does not match the issue I'm having.
    We can run the same UBE/Version within 10 minutes and one will write correct information to F01131 and the second will not. There are various fields in F01131 that are different in addition to the 2 that I mentioned. Some other examples are below

    Field Correct Incorrect
    ZZJOBN Iseries System Name Blank
    ZZMSGP Job has completed EnterpriseOne Job <UBE> , <Version> Comp
    ZZPID PPATapi A number that appears to be the Iseries Process ID

  4. #4
    Member Aarto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Hi! Have seen this happen when environments have been refreshed (data is copied from PROD to TEST) but next numbers / Unique ID tables have not been included in the refresh.. So a ecent run of a UBE would write to WC using a unique ID already having been used

    Hope this helps
    Aarto Reponen

    Managing Director, xperitus Denmark Aps - Your JDE experts in Scandinavia


  5. #5
    The field that I believe is the cause of the issue is ZZMBDS. For the UBE run that posts the correct information that field is 01 (Personal In Basket) and for the incorrect ones the field is 08 (Submitted Jobs). What I cannot determine is how the same UBE run within 15 minutes using the same method is getting different values for this field.

  6. #6
    Member ONYX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Melbourne, AU
    Hello billcros,
    Can you please confirm that you are:
    - Running/submitting the same UBE
    - With the same input data
    - Under the same JDE user
    and it behaves differently?

    The reason I am asking is that JDE Work Center functionality is driven by JDE user/address book setup, settings in jde.ini and whether job encountered any errors/warnings that are expected to be reported in the Work Center messages.
    Oracle Support Document 626538.1 (E1: WRKFLW: Frequently Asked Questions on Work Center) can be found at:

  7. #7
    We figured out what the issue was.

    When a UBE calls another UBE the information that is written to F01131 for the originating UBE is in the unusual (ZZMBDS 08) format. To properly determine if a UBE job has completed successfully we used the processid to determine all of the jobs related to the originating UBE and checked each one for errors.

    The reason that 2 runs of the same UBE behaved differently was that the second run of the UBE didn't submit the second UBE because there was no records to process and the fact that there were no records selected was an error that was detected.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
The legal restrictions and terms of use applicable to this site are available here.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to the terms of use.
JDELIST is NOT affiliated with JD Edwards® & Company, Oracle or Peoplesoft. Contents of this site are neither endorsed nor approved by JD Edwards® & Company and, or Oracle.