For the error in workflow projection call, it seems there are commits in the function/action plsql implementation. These kind of commits are not supported to be used with workflows, and unless these commits are removed and transaction is fully managed by OData, workflow can’t be used.

Hi @Buddhi Gunasekara 

I assumed as much from other community forum posts but, my main question is, how can I achieve my desired end result of ONLY advance invoices with certain payment terms automatically printing?

If I can’t achieve this via a workflow, then how can I achieve this, especially when there doesn’t seem to be documentation on the backend sql procedures/functions?

Thanks,
Bryan

@Lahirumala de Mel

Do you have any input on this?

I guess not… is there anyone willing to respond and shed some light on this obvious limitation of BPA workflows in IFS Cloud?

Sorry I missed this comment. My answer might not help you but if there are commits in the APIs that are used in the Workflow and there are no alternative APIs to be used, perhaps Workflows is not the solution you need to achieve this. Workflows rely on being atomic and it will not be atomic if there are commits in the middle of Workflow execution. Cannot exactly point you to an alternative but worst case is to go for a customization. 

@bdoucette I gave up using workflow for automation. Nowadays I use it maximum for validation of user input. Too many times when I thought of using WF for some ‘light’ automation (at least in my head was light), there was always a commit/rollback/savepoint.

I really do hope IFS R&D will remove this limitation.

Have you considered maybe having an order type that will not stop after invoice is created? This way you could use a dedicated order type for these orders and then the invoice will be automatically printed.

Hi @Marcel.Ausan 

That’s fair, workflows seem really useful until you try to implement them. Not sure why IFS is so nonchalant about fixing an issue that really cripples IFS Cloud development. To any potential new IFS Cloud users, I say run for the hills. Basic functionality is missing from every area in IFS, causing customers to have to build their own platform, which is a mess when the tools we are given to do so are also half-baked as well.

I fixed this current issue by setting up a report rule to manually print this invoice off when created in the system. You can select certain parameters in report rules to filter based off payment terms. Users just have to select ‘print and create’ instead of just ‘create’ when creating the advance invoice and everything should work fine.

Yet again having to create workarounds for something that seemingly would be basic functionality in any other system.