Hi Guys,
I noticed on the Essential GitHub site an upgrade was available. After downloading the .eup file (and updating via Protege - with no errors) and then installing new version of the viewer I went through the process to publish my model to the new version.....which is where I struck a few errors. On Protege I got:
Rendering repository...
Sending repository snapshot...
Checking for access...
Sending XML snapshot...
Failed to send snapshot to the Report Service :
Essential Viewer ReportService encountered an internal error while receiving your repository snapshot. Contact your system administrator and check Essential Viewer server logs for errors, e.g. memory exceptions.
The Tomcat console log provided no hints. However the "Essential-viewer.log" was a bit more informative (copy attached - essential-viewer-1.zip). I did try changing the name of "core_view_api_tl_it_asset_api_tl_get_all_tech_products_roles.xsl" in the vague hope the distro just had an incorrect name but all that did was get rid of the "file not found" error and replace with a: "Too many nested apply-templates calls. The stylesheet may be looping." error (essential-viewer-2.zip).
The "reportXML.xml" generates however and, via usage of the 6.13 viewer, appears to be working ok.......I think...
Please let me know if there's anything you want me to do to assist in finding a cure.
Cheers
Keith
Update: After doing a "folder by folder" comparison with v6.11.2 I noticed update "graph_images" folder that my v6.13 didn't have either "a "uml" sub-folder or a "tmp" sub-folder. Added them and the publish error in Protege has been rectified. However the essential log is still indicating the file not found error as before.
V6.13 (Open Source) Error When Publishing
-
jonathan.carter
- Posts: 1087
- Joined: 04 Feb 2009, 15:44
Hi Keith,
Thanks for posting the issues - and for the efforts you have made to debug the error.
On the first one - about the missing file: technology\api\core_api_views_it_asset_api_tl_get_all_tech_products_roles.xsl, that file is indeed missing and this appears to be a naming discrepancy between the repository and the Viewer. The renaming that you did is the correct thing to do, here.
If you do run into further trouble with that Data Set API instance, I would suggest turning off the 'Is Data Set Api Precached' option for this instance in EA Support / Essential Viewer / Report / Data Set API.
As I mentioned, the first fix that you tried is valid and from the logs that you've sent, I can see that that did indeed clear the error with the missing view.
In both the log files, there is an additional problem which seems to be due to some circular references within your business capability definitions. For example, there is a capability that is defined to contain a sub capability (potentially a number of levels deep) which then contains the first capability.
If you have a manageable suite of business capabilities, you can search through the instances to establish where the circular reference might be - perhaps using the working Business Capability Model view to see if it shows up the circular reference. I've attached a View that you can run on your repository and it will report any circular references in the business capability instances.
From what you've described, it sounds like the repository snapshot is being captured by the Viewer but that the Viewer is reporting "fail" because although it has received the new snapshot, the pre-caching steps have failed. This means that your 6.13 Viewer should be able to run the recursion-finder view. The quickest/easiest way to run this is as follows:
This should help you identify whether the circular reference is in your Business Capability Model.
Let us know how you get on and we'll update the out-of-the-box repository configuration to resolve the Technology Products Data Set API.
Jonathan
Thanks for posting the issues - and for the efforts you have made to debug the error.
On the first one - about the missing file: technology\api\core_api_views_it_asset_api_tl_get_all_tech_products_roles.xsl, that file is indeed missing and this appears to be a naming discrepancy between the repository and the Viewer. The renaming that you did is the correct thing to do, here.
If you do run into further trouble with that Data Set API instance, I would suggest turning off the 'Is Data Set Api Precached' option for this instance in EA Support / Essential Viewer / Report / Data Set API.
As I mentioned, the first fix that you tried is valid and from the logs that you've sent, I can see that that did indeed clear the error with the missing view.
In both the log files, there is an additional problem which seems to be due to some circular references within your business capability definitions. For example, there is a capability that is defined to contain a sub capability (potentially a number of levels deep) which then contains the first capability.
If you have a manageable suite of business capabilities, you can search through the instances to establish where the circular reference might be - perhaps using the working Business Capability Model view to see if it shows up the circular reference. I've attached a View that you can run on your repository and it will report any circular references in the business capability instances.
From what you've described, it sounds like the repository snapshot is being captured by the Viewer but that the Viewer is reporting "fail" because although it has received the new snapshot, the pre-caching steps have failed. This means that your 6.13 Viewer should be able to run the recursion-finder view. The quickest/easiest way to run this is as follows:
- Unzip and copy the attached file into the <Viewer-location>/business directory
- Use the following URL to run this View: http://<your-viewer>/report?XML=reportXML.xml&XSL=business/recursion_finder_business_caps.xsl
This should help you identify whether the circular reference is in your Business Capability Model.
Let us know how you get on and we'll update the out-of-the-box repository configuration to resolve the Technology Products Data Set API.
Jonathan
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Essential Project Team
Hi Jonathan,
Thanks for the reply and guidance - very much appreciated.
I did as you suggested but still got a "Too many nested apply-templates calls. The stylesheet may be looping." error in the Essential_Viewer.log file. After trawling through our business capabilities I couldn't see anything that's recursive (thanks for the tool btw). What I landed on is that maybe it's a shear volume challenge. By way of explanation: we have aligned our business capabilities to APQC (facilitates a natural alignment to processes....we're also aligned to APQC processes as a reference ) - to level 3 which, even cut down, gives us some 530 capabilities. The "worst" nesting is a 1 to 10 to 43. What I found was I had (stupidly I might add.....) added a few level 4 capabilities (haven't figured out why as I hadn't connected/used them in anything.... hence the "stupid" comment). After removing them from the model and resending all appears to be good.
Thanks again for your help in this.
Cheers
Keith
Thanks for the reply and guidance - very much appreciated.
I did as you suggested but still got a "Too many nested apply-templates calls. The stylesheet may be looping." error in the Essential_Viewer.log file. After trawling through our business capabilities I couldn't see anything that's recursive (thanks for the tool btw). What I landed on is that maybe it's a shear volume challenge. By way of explanation: we have aligned our business capabilities to APQC (facilitates a natural alignment to processes....we're also aligned to APQC processes as a reference ) - to level 3 which, even cut down, gives us some 530 capabilities. The "worst" nesting is a 1 to 10 to 43. What I found was I had (stupidly I might add.....) added a few level 4 capabilities (haven't figured out why as I hadn't connected/used them in anything.... hence the "stupid" comment). After removing them from the model and resending all appears to be good.
Thanks again for your help in this.
Cheers
Keith
