2 deliveries created for the same sales order

2 Return Del docs & 2 credit notes were created for one return order no.
Posted: Apr 17, 2008 5:33 PM       E-mail this message      Reply
Dear SAP Support,
I would like to know why does the system created 2 return deliveries with the same qty for a single return order document no.? One return delivery doc.no. was created 2 mins earlier than the 2nd return delivery document no. on the same day. After these 2 return deliveries were created, a credit note was also created for each return delivery doc. number. Here is the document flow:
On Jan. 10, 2008, the Return Order was created
The Delivery block field is set to 90- (Return block)
The Billing block field is blank
On Jan. 14, 2008 @ 12:08:44, the 1st return delivery doc. no. was created. And on the same day also @ 12:10:44, the 2nd delivery doc. was again created. These 2 deliveries were created by 2 users. 1st delivery is by manual job, the 2nd is by background job processing. there was a 2 mins. interval for these 2 deliveries.
On Jan. 21, 2008 @ 9:47:33, the 1st Credit Return Note was created. And on the same day also @ 9:48:00, the 2nd Credit Return Note was again created.
In my initial investigation, I found out that there were changes made on the return order document before the 2 return delivery documents were created. Below are the changes that happened:
On Jan. 14, 2008, @ 9:25:22 hour, the following changes occurred:
a) Delivery block was changed from 90 - (Return block) to blank
b) Billing block was changed from blank to 08 - (check credit memo)
On Jan. 14, 2008, @ 12:08:44, T-Inv Comb field was changed from DC to C
On Jan. 21, 2008, @ 9:47:20, the Billing Block was changed again from 08 - (check credit memo) to blank
Will the above changes, contribute to this issue?
I am also suspecting that the timing on the creation of deliveries via manual job and scheduled background job processig could be the root cause because of the slim time frame between the two job?
I hope you can help me get an explanation to this and how this can be avoided.
Thank you very much in advanced for your help on this matter.
Hoping to hear from you soon.
Kind regards,
Cynthia M. Ondillo
SAP SD Functional Support

Hello Jonathan,
Yes, the 'update document flow' box is ticked and the entry in the 'Pos./negative quantity' field is '+'
Target delivery type is LR - Returns Delivery Source sls doc. type is ZRE - Coats Returns Order
Item category is ZREN - Coats Returns Item
Since we do not see anything missing in the above setting, can we say that it is a system bug when running manual delivery job close to the time for running the scheduled background job?
If it is a system bug, how can this be corrected?
Regards,
Cynthia

Similar Messages

Seggragating Deliveries created for STO and Sales Order

Hi Friends,
I have a requirement..
I am looking for list of deliveries in LIPS table. But I find that this table lists all deliveries created for STOs as well as Sales order. My requirement is to select only those deliveries which are created for Sales orders. Can anybody tell me how to seggragate the deliveries for sales order from deliveries created for STOs? Any other table should I look for deliveries created only for sales order?
Please suggest.
Thanks & Regards
Satya

Hi Satya,
If you need table level data then you can go with method suggested by Andy Slania or if you have access to SQVI, you can join VBFA and LIKP tables and decide on your choice of search and list display. You can save the query for future use.
-Naminator

While filling up the set uptables ran twice for the same sales order number

Hi all,
I ran the set up tables for a sales order number in the morning and then ran again in the evening by mistake so when i see in the rsa3 i can see 2 sales order number.
If i load the same in the sales order header and item ods, will there be any duplicates from ecc to bi?
Thanks
Pooja

Hello,
If you load your ODS in overwrite mode, there should not be any problem.
Regards,
Fred

MRP creating additional purchase requisitions for the existing sales order

Hi,
We have scenario where we switch materials from POD material to ARP material. POD material is just like make to procurement which creates purchase requisition and purchase order upon saving the sales order. ARP (Auto replenishment) material creates purchase requisition based on sales order and re-order point while running MRP.
When the material is POD title, it created purchase requisition and purchase order (example: 4500000110) while saving the sales order (example: 1000000010) for the quantity 10. After some time this material is switched to ARP and it has open sales order (1000000010) and purchase order (4500000110).
We have special MRP run for ARP materials based on MRP type, which creates purchase requisition.. What is happening is when we run MRP; it is creating new purchase requisition for the old sales order (1000000010) for the quantity 10. But old sales order (1000000010) is already having purchase order (4500000110) to fulfill. So we donu2019t want to create new purchase requisition for the old sales orders. It should create purchase requisition only for new sales orders.
Please advise
Thanks in advance
Srinivas

Mangesh,
If the components are Inhouse production then you can think of using collective orders by assigning special procurement key 52. If raw material exists then your requirement cannot be met..as i think your scenario is of assembly processing. The idea of assembly processing is that component materials will always be available and only assembly will be done based on Sale Order.
Regards,
Prasobh

How to prevent modifying the same sales order in R/3 & CRM at the same time

Guys,
We are using CRM 5.0& R/3 4.6C. We have the middle set up. I have noticed that its possible to open the same sales order in R/3 and CRM in the change mode. I believe this could cause inconsistenices if the users modify the same order in different systems. Is there a standar way to prevent this from happening.
Is there something like a change lock like we have the distribution lock?
Anirudh

Hi,
As per OSS Note 705200 scenario X, Y and Z are supported with R/3 4.6C. Even if you use Scenario A, SAP wont support that. I would suggest sceario Z to be implemented. This would convert all the CRM order into R/3 order as soon as they are transferred to R/3. As a result the order can now only be modified in R/3 and all the changes would flow back into CRM maintaining the integrity between the systems.
Refer to OSS Note 541113 for details.
Regards,
Gaurav Gera

How to avoid that two or more people altering the same Sales Order

I'm looking for a way to avoid that two or more people altering the same Sales Order at the same time.
If someone has entered a Sales Order in the system and something needs to be adjust it can be done by two or more people at the same time. The problem is that when someone is saving these changes, the changes of another person, who is still working on the same order, get lost.
So what we need is an alert that someone is already using this order and that no other person can make any changes at that time. So the order needs to be blocked for altering for any other person at that time.
To avoid this I think you have to do something with the Stored Procedure. Or has someone a more simple and better solution. So far I didn't find a standard option in Business One neither a solution in this forum.
Best regards,
Tim

Tim,
There is nothing in the application settings in Business One that could be used to prevent this. You may post this to the SDK forum as well and perhaps there is a way to achieve this through SDK.

How to avoid that two or more people alter the same Sales Order same time

I'm looking for a way to avoid that two or more people altering the same Sales Order at the same time.
If someone has entered a Sales Order in the system and something needs to be adjust it can be done by two or more people at the same time. The problem is that when someone is saving these changes, the changes of another person, who is still working on the same order, get lost.
So what we need is an alert that someone is already using this order and that no other person can make any changes at that time. So the order needs to be blocked for altering for any other person at that time.
To avoid this I think you have to do something with the Stored Procedure. Or has someone a more simple and better solution.
I've already put this thread in the Business One forum and someone suggested to put it in the Business One SDK forum, as there isn't a solution in Business One itself.
So if someone can give me a direction for a solution I would be very pleased.
Best regards,
Tim

Hi Tim,
The only thing that comes close to what you want in standard SBO is Data Ownership. However, this can't stop someone editing a document that is already being edited.
You can't use stored procedures to track which document is open because the SBO_SP_TransactionNotification proc (which is the only one that you are able to customise) is triggered when a document is updated or added (or cancelled or closed) and not when the document is actually being edited in the user-interface.
You could do this by writing an addon that uses the UI API to trap events in the sales order form. In theory, a sales order is being edited if the sales order form is in Update mode (ie in order for the form to be in Update mode, the user must have selected an existing document and changed the value of at least one field). You can trap the event of the user changing a value and then log the user and document in a table. When other users try to edit the same document, you could check the table and then prevent them changing values. When the first user clicks on the update button (or cancels the update or closes the form etc etc) you can remove the lock on the document. However, I have doubts as to how robust it would be. The problem with this kind of locking solution is that you sometimes get 'stranded' locks (eg user was editing a document when their workstation crashed) and the solution can end up being more troublesome than it is worth.
Kind Regards,
Owen

How to put 2 kinds of material prices on the same sales order

Hello SD Gurus,
I have a requirement to put a one-time price (e.g. installation price ) and a recurring monthly price on the same sales order.
I've tried the following but it is not working.
1. I have a pricing procedure (PSER01) in which I'm using the following price types:PR00 (Defined as a "Discount or Surcharge") and PRSV. I'm using PR00 to represent my one-time installation price. I'm using PRSV to represent my monthly+recurring price.
2. I used it for a material master in a sales order. I can add PR00 and see the green traffic light. But as soon as I add PRSV, the traffic light on PR00 turns yellow (Inactive because of subsequent price).
I've read several posts on the forum regarding this. Based on my understanding, I'm using two pricing conditions in one pricing procedure which is not allowed.
What can I do differently to enable the one-time price and monthly price to appear for my material master on the sales order?
Thanks so much for your help!

Hi,
As per SAP Logic, if the condition type has condition class "C" then only one value is allowed.
if you want to add two values ( Fixed + Variable) then you can do the following logic.
1 ) Have one condition type say ZFIX ( Use this for Fixed Value ) cond class = C
2 ) another condition type Say ZVAR(Use this for variable value ) Cond Class = C
3 ) another condition type say Zxxx ( use this for your Final Value) cond class = C
now do not assign any access sequence to the third condition type. write a logic in the "Alt Calculation type " routine to get the value of this condition from the sume of ZFIX + ZVAR
i.e., ZXXX = ZFIX + ZVAR.
Make sure that the sequence of the codition types are mentioned exactly like the above.
this is because if you put ZXXX third then the system automatically ignores the value of ZFIX and ZVAR.
but the values against those condition types will be stores internally. So in future if we want some information also we can trace back..
let me know if you need further help..
thanks..

Email if Notification is created for the same material number

Hi,
IS it possible to get a email Automatically when a notification is created for the same material in last ___days/weeks.
Thanks
SM

Yes. Use the early warning system to send an eamil when ever the number of notifications exceeds a certain number in a given period time for a given group of objects.
You must have the info structures for QM in LIS activated for this to work.
Craig

Idoc not created for a particular sales order

Hi,
For a particular sales order , idoc is not created .
The idoc has to be generated when we create a sales order ,
but for a particular sales order , the idoc is not generated when the sales order is created. The program is assigned in
nace for output type zd00.
RSNASTED is the program which triggers the idoc and FM: IDOC_OUTPUT_ORDRSP.
How to debug and see why the idoc is not generated,
i had kept break point in idoc_output_ordrsp function module
and program rsnasted, but my control does not
reaches this point.
can anyone help me in this issue.
Thanks and regards,
A. thirumaran.
Edited by: thirumaran a on Jul 22, 2008 1:35 PM

Hi,
Could you please check if the output is processed or not, whether in the output type what all conditions you have maintained e.g send immediately.
Reward me point if you find this helpful.
regds.......
Sumit

Oracle Coherence*Web and BlazeDS: Multiple FlexSessions created for the same HttpSession

Hi all,
I have searched this forum and found a lot of good information from Alex Glosband and others about the infamous "Detected duplicate HTTP - based FlexSessions, generally due to the remote host disabling session cookies. Session coolkies must be enable to manage the client connection correctly." message.
It seems, however, none of the cases are identical to ours. This is ours:
- Resin 3.1.9
- Oracle Coherence 3.7.1 with Coherence*Web (session replication)
With this setup we get the "Detected duplicate HTTP..." message on the first attempt to use BlazeDS and on every subsequent call. The same client and server code works fine in a local sessions setup. With Coherence 3.3 (currently our production environment) it seems to occur less frequently, but still as frequent as it is a major issue for us. It fails even with a single node using in-process distributed caching in our test setup (as well as with multi node out of process caching in our staging environment, for Coherence knowledgeable the resin app server runs with tangosol.coherence.session.localstorage=true in the first case and false in the second).
Both the listener and message broker are mapped as "Coherence aware" in web.xml[1] so that they should use clustered sessions.
We have been digging a bit and we found out that if we commented out lines 427 and 434 of flex.messaging.endpoints.BaseHTTPEndpoint from version 4.0.0.14931 it seems to mask the bug. We added some logging in the setupFlexClient method and it seems that we get more or less a new FlexSession for each and every call - but they have the same cookie and thus underlying HttpSession. I.e. the list returned from flexClient.getFlexSessions() keeps growing. Thus we are not so keen on going to production with that memory leak and the above mentioned ugly hack of commenting out the detection of duplicates.
We use request scope for the remote object, but could in theory use any scope as we do not really have any state on the object itself, it is all HttpSession state and return values that are key (logon is performed prior to doing the first blaze call, in pure forms and ajax, and it is not a timing issue in that regard we are seeing).
Hope someone can shed some light on what can be happening. Is there any "reference testing"[2] or something when the FlexSessions are created that makes them being created as new? Where are they created? We do not know the inner workings of the BlazeDS source, we just watched the call trace of the unwanted invalidation and found that to be line 427 of flex.messaging.endpoints.BaseHTTPEndpoint.
Can we disable FlexSessions? Since the flex and plain html parts of the app share the sessions, we always use FlexContext.getHttpRequest().getSession() anyway, never storing any state directly in the FlexSession or on the remote object. Or maybe there is a config option to help us with this detection (or creation) of multiple FlexSessions?
Cheers and TIA,
-S-
[1] - For instance, this i the message broker servlet def:
<servlet>
<servlet-name>MessageBrokerServlet</servlet-name>
<display-name>MessageBrokerServlet</display-name>
<servlet-class>com.tangosol.coherence.servlet.api22.ServletWrapper</servlet-class>
<init-param>
<param-name>coherence-servlet-class</param-name>
<param-value>flex.messaging.MessageBrokerServlet</param-value>
</init-param>
<init-param>
<param-name>services.configuration.file</param-name>
<param-value>/WEB-INF/flex/services-config.xml</param-value>
</init-param>
<load-on-startup>1</load-on-startup>
</servlet>
[2] - As you undertstand this is speculation based on pure air, but it could be that in Coherence there was a serialization/deserialization happening somehow that would break such a test?

Just a quick update, it seems things are running in a stable fashion (and without visible memory leaks, just keeping the latest FlexSession) with these changes in BaseHTTPEndpoint:
     * Overrides to guard against duplicate HTTP-based sessions for the same FlexClient which will occur if the remote host has disabled session
     * cookies.
     * @see AbstractEndpoint#setupFlexClient(String)
    @Override
    public FlexClient setupFlexClient(String id) {
        log.debug("setupFlexClient start id " + id);
        FlexClient flexClient = super.setupFlexClient(id);
        // Scan for duplicate HTTP-sessions and if found, invalidate them and throw a MessageException.
        // A request attribute is used to deal with batched AMF messages that arrive in a single request by trigger multiple passes through this
        // method.
        boolean duplicateSessionDetected = (FlexContext.getHttpRequest().getAttribute(REQUEST_ATTR_DUPLICATE_SESSION_FLAG) != null);
        if (!duplicateSessionDetected) {
            List<FlexSession> sessions = flexClient.getFlexSessions();
            log.debug("Client has " + sessions.size() + " sessions.");
            int n = sessions.size();
            if (n > 1) {
                int count = 0;
                for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
                    if (sessions.get(i) instanceof HttpFlexSession)
                        count++;
                    if (count > 1) {
                        FlexContext.getHttpRequest().setAttribute(REQUEST_ATTR_DUPLICATE_SESSION_FLAG, Boolean.TRUE);
                        duplicateSessionDetected = true;
                        break;
        // If more than one was found, remote host isn't using session cookies. Kill all duplicate sessions and return an error.
        // Simplest to just re-scan the list given that it will be very short, but use an iterator for concurrent modification.
        int i = 0;
        if (duplicateSessionDetected) {
            List<FlexSession> sessions = flexClient.getFlexSessions();
            log.debug("Detected sessions from client: " + sessions);
            for (FlexSession session : sessions) {
                if (session instanceof HttpFlexSession && i < sessions.size()) {
//                    log.debug("----> sessionId: " + session.getId());
//                    Enumeration e1 = session.getAttributeNames();
//                    while (e1.hasMoreElements()) {
//                        Object key = e1.nextElement();
//                        log.debug("--------->" + key + "--------->" + session.getAttribute((String) key));
//                    session.invalidate();
                    flexClient.sessionDestroyed(session);
                i++;
            // Return an error to the client.
//            DuplicateSessionException e = new DuplicateSessionException();
//            e.setMessage(ERR_MSG_DUPLICATE_SESSIONS_DETECTED);
//            throw e;
        return flexClient;
It is not exactly beautiful (to say the least), but if it does the trick I might just be pragmatic enough to go with it... NB: I am of course not proposing this as a patch to this file or anything, it is just an ugly hack for our specific case, but maybe the information can help the BlazeDS team find the root cause making it incompatible with Coherence*Web.
Will give it a test run on our staging servers.

Count deliveries for the same sale sorder

Hello
I would like to use the query to count how many deliveries have been made for the sales order
I have the following but it gives me an error message because I do not know how to use the function count
COUNT T0.BaseEntry FROM ORDR T0, DLN1 T1 WHERE (T0.DocEntry = T1.DocEntry) AND T1.BaseRef = $[$38.44.11.Number]

thanks for your prompt reply
I found the answer and you confirm this
SELECT COUNT (T1.BaseEntry) FROM ORDR T0, DLN1 T1 WHERE (T0.DocEntry = T1.DocEntry) AND T1.BaseRef = $[$38.44.11.Number]
If you remember I need to number the back order when I have the result in that query will be used in the delivery note process table ORDR.
Then when the result is 1 it will be numbered as A
When the result is 2 it will be B and so on

Delivery from Project for the Assembly: sales order item

Hi,
When I create a sales order lets say for material "A".
And I want to deliver this component from sales order. With Production order.
I have attached the material "A" in Project to an activity with a positive quantity, in MD04 I am unable to see the planned order for that.
Project is released and it has created a order reservation but i am unable to convert it into the Planned order how it can be achieved.
Material is not relevent for the MRP.
Please suggest some solution.

Hi,
Please run project MRP (MD51), selecting option 3 (planned orders) against create P.req. field under MRP control parameters tab.
Planned orders will be created automatically & u can see in MD04 also.
Thanks
Kishore

2 pricing procedures for the same sales area

Hi Gurus.,
              My client requirement is the client requires 2 pricing procedures for the combination of Same sales areaDEocument Pricing procedurecustomer pricing procedure in OVKK
He doesnt want to use new sales area or new document pricing procedure or new customer pricing procedure,I know that in standard SAP it is not possible.
Can any of the gurus throw some light on this.Some work around is required here,So can u please say the required changes in Standard functionality.
Thanks & Regards
Narayana
Message was edited by:
        manam narayana
Message was edited by:
        manam narayana
Message was edited by:
        manam narayana

Hi Gurus.,
               First of all thank you very much for giving me so tremendous response, But my client requirement is,
              He has one customer and for that customer when raising an order ,for some orders Tax shouldnot caliculate and for some orders Tax should be caliculated,
        For example : If he gives price 100,Then the base price should be 100,For some orders he gives price as 130 rs which is inclusive of tax like 110 should be the base price and 20 rs tax should get caliculated
           So i have tried in the pricing procedures and we have standard pricing procedure RVAA01 & RVAB01 ,In which RVAB01 is the price inclusive of tax procedure,We can assighn different pricing procedures if any of the combination in OVKK is changed,But he dont want to change the combination in OVKK.
        So client asks now when he raise an order he decides how the price should be caliculated, i.e the price may be he give price or price inclusive tax,of which the pricing procedure should automatically split the tax and price accordingly,He is asking in the way like when we raise a sales order we should do like a pop up box should appear asking which pricing procedure should be selected,So on selecting the pricing procedure the order should caliculate based on the selected pricing procedure
Thanks & Regards
Narayana

Two invoice types order-related from the same sales order type

Hi experts,
I need to assign a different invoice type to two different items categories regarding to invoice each item with a different invoice rumber range and a different accounting document type (one 'RV' and another 'PF').
Neither of them have delivery.
I' ve assigned in the copy controls from sales orders to invoices the items categories to the corresponding invoice type in order to avoid the items are invoiced by wrong invoice type.
Exem:
item category ZIC1 must be invoiced by invoice type ZF1
item category ZIC2 must be invoiced by invoice type ZF2
I executed VF04 twice: first regarging to create ZF1 and second create ZF2.
1) If I insert ZF1 invoice type (order-related) by default in the sales orders definition (Sales and Distribution -> Sales -> Sales -> Sales Document Header -> Define Sales Document Types), the item ZIC1 is properly invoiced and the ZIC2 too. But: although I already invoiced both items, SAP laves the sales order opened waiting to create ZF1 for ZIC2.
2) If I don't fill the invoice type by defautl, the invoicing can't be done because the invoice type isn't determined (VKDFS-FKART empty).
I want to know if there is any exit to change the values of VKDFS entries for each item of sales orders before to process this table with VKDFS.
Thanks in advance,
Aupalaura

Hi,
thanks a lot for the quick answer.
But in save document prepare it's not this structure. And the field for save the invoice type by default is at header level FKARA (in VBAK table).
Anyway, I'll check it.
Regards,
Aupalaura

2 deliveries created for the same sales order

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for