Wednesday, January 20, 2010

FRM-40734:Internal Error:PL/SQL error occurred

Introduction 
 
It was one of those days when things get delayed and you go past the deadline. Last week I faced a similar situation when an Oracle R12.1 (E-Business Suite 12.1) clone was not completed successfully.  
 
Problem 
 
All the cloning tasks were completed, however, during testing of the cloned instance, I discovered that Oracle Forms was having a problem.
  1. Launch any form ( For e.g Login as SYSADMIN=> System Administrator => Concurrent => Requests )
  2. The forms window opens, but it goes into an hour glass mode and after a few minutes it displays the following error message at the bottom of the form
FRM-40734:Internal Error:PL/SQL error occurred  
 
Troubleshooting 
 
I searched for the occurrence of the above error in all the logfiles in the $INST_TOP/logs/ora/10.1.3/opmn directory including the forms_default_group_1 subdirectory. But everything seemed normal in these logfiles with no reference to the above error code and message. I also performed a routine check of the $INST_TOP/logs/ora/10.1.3/j2ee/oacore directory, but no clue at all. This seemed to be one of those errors when the logfiles do not give much information for troubleshooting purposes. 
 
Solution 
 
Because of the several steps involved in the cloning process, I was under the impression that I could have done a mistake or missed a step or two. Hence I executed all the cloning steps again. But the issue refused to go away. I used the adadmin utility to run the 'Compile APPS schema', 'Generate form files', 'Compile menu information' and the 'Compile flexfields' programs. But the issue still refused to go away. Finally, we ran the 'Generate product JAR files' adadmin program which helped fix the problem.  
 
Conclusion 
 
So you now know the trick when you face the same symptoms that I faced above !!

Sunday, January 3, 2010

Codeline B Patch readme containing Codeline A prereqs and Codeline C postreqs

Introduction 
 
Oracle has introduced the concept of "Codelevels" and "Codelines" in the new E-Business Suite Release 12. The first base release in R12 is 12.0 (also called Point Release). All the patches introduced on top of this point release are said to be on Codeline A. 12.0 is also called the Codelevel A. The next Codelevel in R12 is Codelevel 12.1 and its Codeline is B. Similary 12.2 and Codeline C. Compare this with the E-Business Suite 11i version when Codelevels were instead called as maintenance packs (11.5.8, 11.5.9, 11.5.10 etc.) Furthermore, Oracle says in one of its support notes, that it is "not possible to apply a Codeline A patch on an E-Business Suite system that is already on Codeline B (12.1 point release)". So that should mean that Codeline A patches are not compatible to apply on a Codeline B system.  
 
Problem 
 
Our E-Business Suite system is on 12.1 point release. The other day I was analyzing a patch xxyyzz.R12.AR.B to be applied for fixing an "Accounts Recievables" issue and I noticed a few discrepancies in the patch's README file. 
 
 Issue #1 (Prereqs) 
 
The README mentioned several prerequisite patches to be applied to be applied prior to applying the actual patch. One of the prereqs mentioned as a Codeline A patch aabbcc.R12.AR.A. I checked with the Oracle Support team and they mentioned that its a "typo" in the README and it was immediately taken care of. 
 
 Issue #2 (Postreqs) 
 
The README mentioned several postrequisite patches as well and one of them was a Codeline C patch ! ppqqrr.R12.AR.C. This time the answer from Oracle Support was not an expected one. As per Oracle Support, some of the products on 12.1 release have been using the C codelevel due to an intermediate release of some vertical products falling in the same product line. So in 12.1, one can see some products with the C label too.  
 
Conclusion 
 
Please seek a clarification from Oracle Support (in the form of a Service Request) if you find a patch that contains prereqs and postreqs from different Codelines. Most of the times it could be a typo in the patch README and sometimes it may be a valid case !!!