You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Describe the bug
I am running RFC server with PyRFC. Sometimes, when registered function is triggered I get parse error. From SAP, we are sending the data with structure BAPI_ORDER_HEADER1 to RFC Server.
To Reproduce
The error occurs as soon as any of TIMS (time) data type value (for example SCHED_START_TIME) is set to 240000 (24:00:00).
If I change the value to 000000, then there is no error.
Screenshots
Environment
OS: Windows 10 VM
Python 3.11.2
PyRFC 2.7.1
SAP 2019 on premise
Additional context
Tested also with PyRFC 3.1 (in this case there was no error, but also registered function was not called at all)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It is a bug, caused by not passing the date/time handling configuration to server. The standard configuration returns DATE and TIMS ABAP fields as strings. Here the server tries to create the Python datetime object from "240000" and fails. It should just pass the ABAP string as-is, without interpretation. The fix should be available early next week.
new server configuration options are added in release 3.2, so that strict TIMS value check can be disabled.
When set to False, like in this example, the Python server will not complain about ABAP TIMS values out of standard range:
Describe the bug
I am running RFC server with PyRFC. Sometimes, when registered function is triggered I get parse error. From SAP, we are sending the data with structure BAPI_ORDER_HEADER1 to RFC Server.
To Reproduce
The error occurs as soon as any of TIMS (time) data type value (for example SCHED_START_TIME) is set to 240000 (24:00:00).
If I change the value to 000000, then there is no error.
Screenshots
Environment
Additional context
Tested also with PyRFC 3.1 (in this case there was no error, but also registered function was not called at all)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: