Applies to:
Product Release: V7 (Enterprise)Version: 7.8.2 [19213] FRA Engy/Oil
Database: Oracle 9.2.0.7
Application Server OS: Sun Solaris 10
Database Server OS: Sun Solaris 10
This document was previously published as Siebel SR 38-3162863721.
Symptoms
SBL-CFG-00124When a rule is not configured properly, an error message (a popup) appears when validating or
customizing the product.
However, this message is not understandable : it has been
reproduced on a Vanilla SRF and a sample base.
Indeed, the message does not indicate that
the issue comes from a rule as it did in 7.5.2
Moreover the name of the non working rule is
not mentioned (which is a problem when 200 rules are implemented in a customizable
product)
As the error message in Siebel 7.8 should be detailed as in Siebel 7.5, do you
know how we can make the popup error contain :
· The cause of the
problem
· The name of the rule, that does not
work
· A short description of the problem
Kind regards,
Solution
Message 1
For the benefit of other readers:Description:
When a rule is not configured properly, an error message (a popup) appears when validating or customizing the product.
However, this message is not understandable: it has been reproduced on a standard SRF and a sample base.
Indeed, the message does not indicate that the issue comes from a rule as it did in 7.5.2
Moreover the name of the non working rule is not mentioned (which is a problem when 200 rules are implemented in a customizable product)
As the error message in Siebel 7.8 should be detailed as in Siebel 7.5, do you know how we can make the popup error contain?
• The cause of the problem
• The name of the rule that does not work
• A short description of the problem
Resolution:
Technical Support has reproduced this behavior and the following Change Request has been logged in order to address this behavior: # 12-1GK35E6 “Error SBL-CFG-00124: A better error description”.
Keywords: Error , SBL-CFG-00124, description, rule, validate, customizable product, eConfigurator, Advanced rule, Administration – Product, Constraint, Product Definition
Applies to:
Product Release: V7 (Enterprise)Version: 7.5.2.214 [16066]
Database: Oracle 8.1.7.3
Application Server OS: Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server SP 3
Database Server OS: HP-UX 11.0
This document was previously published as Siebel SR 38-1221526812.
Symptoms
SBL-CFG-00124Hi,
I am working on the following scenario:
There is an existent product “LEC
Request_Test” that has two relationships: one with ‘Domain Type’ Product and another one with
‘Domain Type’ Class. The second relationship has 10 products attached, each having a different
class.
The change I am working on has two steps:
- Addition of an eleventh product
(“LEC Test”) to the second relationship of “LEC Request_Test” product.
- Addition of “LEC
Request_Test” as a sub-product of a new product (“DSL PPPoE”).
Following is the
description of the issue I encountered during testing:
- I first added “LEC Request_Test” to
“DSL PPPoE” without adding the 11th element to the second relationship and it worked fine.
-
After I added “LEC Test” sub-product to “LEC Request_Test” and then validated “DSL PPPoE”, I got
the following error message:
Error getting new worker.
Fatal error completing
model.
Exception 44 in Worker module.
Catalog did not build. Possible model
inconsistency.
Note: the application contains similar products to “DSL PPPoE” (i.e. that
include “LEC Request_Test” as a sub-product) that still work even when I add the 11th sub-product
to the second relationship.
I found a work around to this issue by adding the 11th
sub-product as a separate relationship but I am not sure that it will be accepted by our client.
Is this problem a known Siebel Product Configurator bug? Is there other work around
available?
Please find attached a document with pictures that illustrate my
issue.
Thank you for your assistance,
Solution
Message 1
For the Benefit of Other Readers:Behavior:
I was able to reproduce the behavior in vanilla, Sample db & vanilla SRF. 7.5.2.217 SIA
DSL PPPoE CP
- LEC Reqest_Test CP
- Relationship 1
- 11 child products
Seems like the 11th product (LEC Test) added to the LEC REC_Test CP (customizable product) produces the error message for DSL PPPoE CP:
Error getting new worker.
Fatal error completing model.
Exception 44 in Worker module.
Catalog did not build. Possible model inconsistency.
Resolution:
The above behavior was determined to be a product defect and Change Request 12-KDGZM8 has been submitted to address it. This behavior was not reproduciable in 7.5.3.4 SIA. So upgrading/patching to 7.5.3.4 SIA from 7.5.2.214 SIA is a work-around.
The other work-around is to add the 11th product in a different relationship and not in Relationship 1.
Applies to:
Product Release: V7 (Enterprise)Version: 7.7.2.3 [18361]
Database: Microsoft SQL Server 2000 SP3
Application Server OS: Microsoft Windows 2000 Server SP 4
Database Server OS: Microsoft Windows 2000 Server SP 4
This document was previously published as Siebel SR 38-2940475481.
Symptoms
Hiwe have upgraded from 7.5.3.11 to 7.7.2.3
We have a CP with a number of products and relationships. I have updated a couple of product relationships, but when I go to validate I get the error
Error getting new worker.
<?>
<?> (SBL-CFG-00124)
so, I deleted the Relationships, but still I am getting the error. I did not used to get such errors in 7.5.
Steps to Reproduce
1. Navigate to Administration - Product
2. Query for the specific CP and drill down
3. Click on Customizable Product Tab and click Validate
Please let me know how to get rid of this error.
Please contact Larry Syphus (Ph. 801-265-4569) or Raghu (Ph. 651-736-5351)
regards
Raghu
PS: cc me on this SR at riyengar@mmm.com
Solution
Message 1
For the benefit of other users: Change Request 12-1CT6PEG was logged to have a better error description when the following error occurs, rather that just having <?> in the error message as below:Error getting new worker.
<?>
<?> (SBL-CFG-00124)
Thank you and best regards,
Siebel Technical Support
Applies to:
Product Release: V7 (Enterprise)Version: 7.5.2.211 [16061] FRA Engy/Oil
Database: Oracle 8.1.7.4
Application Server OS: Sun Solaris 8
Database Server OS: Sun Solaris 8
This document was previously published as Siebel SR 38-1075501261.
Symptoms
SBL-CFG-00124Hey,
We have a problem with the configurator's administration when we try to realise the
following actions :
We create a class with its Dynamic Attributes and we personnalize a
product based on this new class. The validation is OK. The day after, we add a Dynamic Attribute
to the class and we create a new version to modify the personalized product. We add the new
Dynamic Attribute in the User Interface and we create a rule based on this attribute. It's a
"require" rule which use the new Dynamic Attribute and a new product relationship (When the
attribute Forfaitisation de la facture annuelle = OUI requires selection of Forfaitisation de la
facture annuelle De Forfaitisation de la facture annuelle ). When we try to validate the
configuration, we note a peculiar and dangerous behavior :
- With a Thin Client, the object
manager on the server crashes
- With a Fat Client, this error's message appears " Erreur lors
de l'obtention d'un nouvel employé. Impossible de créer un nouveau Worker." (Here is the
approximate translation of this message "Error when obtaining a new employee. Impossible to
create a new worker.")
If we modify the name of the Dynamic Attribute (For example, we add a
"-" in the middle of the name) and re-do the User Interface Item and the rule, the validation is
now OK.
This peculiar behavior is not acceptable as it complexifies the administration. It's
important to hnow that users will connected through Thin Clients. Therefore this behavior will
impact all users when the system is in production.
Regards,
Pascal
Solution
Message 1
For the benefit of other readers:The behavior could be reproduced is caused by a defect: when a customizable product contains identical names for a relationship and an attribute, this might result in an error when there is a rule that references the relationship and the attribute. Change Request 12-CUBE03 has been logged to address this behavior.
The suggested workaround is to rename either the relationship or the attribute.
Siebel Technical Support
Applies to:
Product Release: V7 (Enterprise)Version: 7.5.2.216 [16084] SVE Com/Med
Database: Oracle 8.1.7
Application Server OS: Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server SP 3
Database Server OS: Sun Solaris 2.8
This document was previously published as Siebel SR 38-1048979867.
Symptoms
SBL-CFG-00124Hello
We have Models which have relationship domain type as
Class but no class associated to it asthe products under that relationship have different
classes. I have started getting an error message recently
Error getting New Worker
Fatal
Error Completing model
I searched the Supporweb and a Product Defect 12-FTALD3 was created
for this issue. Could you advise whether this has been solved if yes can we get a patch for this
to be applied to our systems.
we are in UAT now and this is effecting all our testing.
Thanks
Solution
Message 1
Resolution:Two issues were found in this behavior.
1. If the product model has the following structure, it gives error while trying to customize it.
A customizable product (CP) which also contains nested CP as in CP 2 below:
CP 1
CP 2
Prod A
Prod B
And product A & B belong to two different classes, and there is a rule in CP 2 (say, Prod A excludes Prod B),
This was identified as a Product Defect. Change Request 12-FTALD3 and Patch Request 12-HEF1KR have been logged to address this Defect. CR 12-FTALD3 has been fixed in v 7.7. Customers encountering this behavior are advised to log a Service Request referencing the Change Request number.
2. Products without the above structure were also giving the above mentioned error. It was found that the rules under those products were corrupted. Re-writing these rules resolved the behavior. Cause of the rule corruption could not be determined. However, as a good practice to avoid such incorrect behavior, the customer has been advised to test and validate each product to confirm if the model and rules work correctly before going forward.
Thank you,
No comments:
Post a Comment