2 for all entries with different condition

Hi
i have an internal 2 internal table which have the following field
ITAB1 : Stock category, plant, storage location , SKU code (those value are given though flat file)
ITAB2 : Grid value , meterial NO, SKU code (those values are determine through a FM where we export the SKU code and it will retreive the matnr and grid value in an ITAB2)
I have to do select FROM database MCHB
with the condition Grid value , material NO , Stock category, plant, storage location
Note that gris value and matnr are found in two different internal table i was thinking of doing for all entries but
is it possible to do for all entries from 2 internal table
SELECT FOROM MCHB
FOR ALL ENTRIES in ITAB1
FOR ALL ENTRIES in ITAB2
WHERE
grid value = itab2-gridvalue
matnr = itab2-matnr
stock cat = itab1-stock cat
plant = itab1-plant
storage location = itab1-storage location
Please help on how to tackle this?

Hi,
You have to create a new third internal table with the fields matnr, grid value, stock category, plant and storage location....
Then process the itab1 and get the process the itab2 for the corresponding SKU Code (which I believe is the common field for both of the internal tables) and then populate the third internal table itab3...
Then use the itab3 for the FOR ALL ENTRIES.
Thanks
Naren

Similar Messages

For All Entries with two tables

Hi All,
         Can we use FOR ALL ENTRIES with two tables. for example
SELECT * FROM MKPF INTO TABLE T_MKPF
         WHERE BUDAT IN S_BUDAT.
SELECT * FROM MARA INTO TABLE T_MARA
         WHERE MTART IN S_MTART AND
                        MAKTL IN S_MAKTL.
SELECT * FROM MSEG INTO TABLE T_MSEG
       FOR ALL ENTRIES IN "T_MKPF AND T_MARA"
              WHERE MBLNR EQ T_MKPF-MBLNR AND
                             MATNR EQ T_MARA-MATNR.
can we do it like this or any other way to do this plz tell. I waitting for your responce.
Thanks
Jitendra

Hi,
u cannot do like this....chek some documentation on it..
1. duplicate rows are automatically removed
2. if the itab used in the clause is empty , all the rows in the source table will be selected .
3. performance degradation when using the clause on big tables.
Say for example you have the following abap code:
Select * from mara
For all entries in itab
Where matnr = itab-matnr.
If the actual source of the material list (represented here by itab) is actually another database table, like:
select matnr from mseg
into corresponding fields of table itab
where .
Then you could have used one sql statement that joins both tables.
Select t1.*
From mara t1, mseg t2
Where t1.matnr = t2.matnr
And T2..
So what are the drawbacks of using the "for all entires" instead of a join ?
At run time , in order to fulfill the "for all entries " request, the abap engine will generate several sql statements (for detailed information on this refer to note 48230). Regardless of which method the engine uses (union all, "or" or "in" predicates) If the itab is bigger then a few records, the abap engine will break the itab into parts, and rerun an sql statement several times in a loop. This rerun of the same sql statement , each time with different host values, is a source of resource waste because it may lead to re-reading of data pages.
returing to the above example , lets say that our itab contains 500 records and that the abap engine will be forced to run the following sql statement 50 times with a list of 10 values each time.
Select * from mara
Where matnr in ( ...)
Db2 will be able to perform this sql statement cheaply all 50 times, using one of sap standard indexes that contain the matnr column. But in actuality, if you consider the wider picture (all 50 executions of the statement), you will see that some of the data pages, especially the root and middle-tire index pages have been re-read each execution.
Even though db2 has mechanisms like buffer pools and sequential detection to try to minimize the i/o cost of such cases, those mechanisms can only minimize the actual i/o operations , not the cpu cost of re-reading them once they are in memory. Had you coded the join, db2 would have known that you actually need 500 rows from mara, it would have been able to use other access methods, and potentially consume less getpages i/o and cpu.
In other words , when you use the "for all entries " clause instead of coding a join , you are depriving the database of important information needed to select the best access path for your application. Moreover, you are depriving your DBA of the same vital information. When the DBA monitors & tunes the system, he (or she) is less likely to recognize this kind of resource waste. The DBA will see a simple statement that uses an index , he is less likely to realize that this statement is executed in a loop unnecessarily.
Beore using the "for all entries" clause and to evaluate the use of database views as a means to:
a. simplify sql
b. simplify abap code
c. get around open sql limitations.
check the links
http://www.thespot4sap.com/articles/SAPABAPPerformanceTuning_ForAllEntries.asp
The specified item was not found.
Regards,
Nagaraj

For all entries with inner join

Hi All,
I found some unusual thing.
i have written INNERJOIN along with FOR ALL ENTRIES and also INNERJOIN in loop..endloop. I have tested both programs with around 1000 records, i found that INNERJOIN with FOR ALL ENTRIES is taking more time compared to the other one. As we know FOR ALL ENTRIES with SIMPLE SELECT takes less time compared to select in loop..endloop. Anybody tell me is there any specific reason for this
thanks in advance
rajavardhana reddy

Have a look at this weblog by Dharmaveer Singh:
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/weblogs?blog=/pub/wlg/2986 [original link is broken] [original link is broken] [original link is broken] [original link is broken] [original link is broken] [original link is broken] [original link is broken] [original link is broken]
Sudha

SELECT with and without for all entries giving different results

Hi All,
For some reason unknown to me ,
There is a difference in result between the below mentioned query however the logic is same.
1 . lw_ebeln-EBELN = '0000366416'.
     APPEND lw_ebeln to lt_ebeln.
      SELECT    ebeln
     FROM     ekbe
     INTO TABLE lt_ekbe
     FOR ALL ENTRIES IN lt_ebeln
     WHERE ebeln = lt_ebeln-ebeln
2. SELECT ebeln from ekbe into table lt_ekbe where
ebeln = '0000366416'..
I have tried a lot to find the reason but unable to.
Thanks,
Faiz

Hi faizur,
Hope it help ful.
If you add the EBELP in Internal table, you will be getting same number of entries in both query.
For all entries Removes the Duplicate key.
Regards,
Venkat.

Select For all entries with multiple keys

Dear Developers,
im writing a program which reads the last the last mseg entry with bwart 101 and bwart 201 an writes it into different fields of a table. In dependance of the bwart the max-value of mkpf-budat should be moved into field wedat or wadat.
At the moment i use this coding:
loop at gt_daten assigning <fs_daten>.
    select distinct max( budat ) from wb2_v_mkpf_mseg2 into <fs_daten>-wedat
      where matnr_i = <fs_daten>-matnr
        and werks_i = <fs_daten>-werks
        and lgort_i = <fs_daten>-lgort
        and bwart_i = '101'.
    select distinct max( budat ) from wb2_v_mkpf_mseg2 into <fs_daten>-wadat
    where matnr_i = <fs_daten>-matnr
      and werks_i = <fs_daten>-werks
      and lgort_i = <fs_daten>-lgort
      and bwart_i = '201'.
endloop.
wb2_v_mkpf_mseg2 is a view combining mkpf an mseg by primary keys.
Searching the internet i read, using FOR ALL ENTRIES should be prefered to selectstatements in loops.
So i tried:
*selectstatement
select budat matnr_i werks_i lgort_i bwart_i from wb2_v_mkpf_mseg2 into table lt_mseg for all entries in gt_daten
    where matnr_i = gt_daten-matnr
      and werks_i = gt_daten-werks
      and lgort_i = gt_daten-lgort
      and ( bwart_i = '101' or bwart_i = '201' )
*Substitute the MAX( )-Function
sort lt_mseg descending by matnr werks lgort bwart budat.
delete adjacent duplicates from lt_mseg comparing matnr werks lgort bwart.
*Differ between wedat and wadat
loop at gt_daten assigning <fs_daten>.
    loop at lt_mseg assigning <fs_mseg>
      where matnr = <fs_daten>-matnr
        and werks = <fs_daten>-werks
        and lgort = <fs_daten>-lgort.
      case <fs_mseg>-bwart.
        when '101'.
          <fs_daten>-wedat = <fs_mseg>-budat.
        when '201'.
          <fs_daten>-wadat = <fs_mseg>-budat.
      endcase.
    endloop.
Even in the dev-system this takes twice the time of the "nested" selects.
Imho this is because of the internal OR interpretation of the FOR ALL ENTRIES-statement and the size of the result.
Can somebody give me a hint, how to tune this code?
Select Inner join should be difficult because the target field differs, dependent of the value in bwart...
Thanks in advance!

I understand that you are trying to capture the maximum value of posting date MKPF-BUDAT for movement types 101 and 201 for each combination of material, plant and storage location.
Few things, that makes the below coding more efficient at both application and database level and I confirmed this on an IDES sandbox
1. Along with MKPF and MSEG, there is another table WBGT, in the view WB2_V_MKPF_MSEG join and also WBGT has select condition restrictions imposed on its fields. So if this restriction impacts your selection you may want to do a INNER JOIN of MSEG with MKPF only (with MSEG as leading table, as it has an active secondary index with MATNR, WERKS, LGORT and BWART ) and also there won't be overhead from the unnecessary join with WBGT table whose fields you are not using.
2. The below SORT on lt_mseg will ensure that the record having greatest BUDAT will be at the top of all rows (least index) for each combination of MATNR, WERKS, LGORT and BWART.
3. DELETE ADJACENT DUPLICATES will ensure that only the top row (having greatest BUDAT) remains in the table lt_mseg for each combination of MATNR, WERKS, LGORT and BWART. This will ensure that subsequent READs with BINARY SEARCH will always and efficiently read the row with maximum value of BUDAT for each unique combination of MATNR, WERKS, LGORT and BWART.
4. The below logic will require more memory (even though it is more efficient performance wise) compared to direct SELECT with MAX for each MATNR, WERKS, LGORT and BWART in a LOOP the way you were doing before. So if the size of lt_mseg is causing memory issues, your logic with aggregate function MAX at database level will be your only option.
So, I propose you revise your coding like below for most optimal results
CHECK NOT gt_daten[] IS INITIAL.
*selectstatement
*SELECT budat matnr_i werks_i lgort_i bwart_i
* FROM wb2_v_mkpf_mseg2
* INTO TABLE lt_mseg
*    FOR ALL ENTRIES IN gt_daten
*    WHERE matnr_i = gt_daten-matnr
*      AND werks_i = gt_daten-werks
*      AND lgort_i = gt_daten-lgort
*      AND ( bwart_i = '101' OR bwart_i = '201' ).
* The below SELECT is more economical than the one commented above
SELECT mkpf~budat mseg~matnr mseg~werks mseg~lgort mseg~bwart
FROM mseg INNER JOIN mkpf
    ON mseg~mblnr = mkpf~mblnr AND
       mseg~mjahr = mkpf~mjahr
    INTO TABLE lt_mseg
      FOR ALL ENTRIES IN gt_daten
        WHERE mseg~matnr = gt_daten-matnr
          AND mseg~werks = gt_daten-werks
          AND mseg~lgort = gt_daten-lgort
          AND ( mseg~bwart = '101' OR mseg~bwart = '201' ).
*Substitute the MAX( )-Function
SORT lt_mseg BY matnr werks lgort bwart DESCENDING budat.
DELETE ADJACENT DUPLICATES FROM lt_mseg COMPARING matnr werks lgort bwart.
*Differ between wedat and wadat
LOOP AT gt_daten ASSIGNING <fs_daten>.
READ TABLE lt_mseg ASSIGNING <fs_mseg>
    WITH KEY matnr = <fs_daten>-matnr
             werks = <fs_daten>-werks
             lgort = <fs_daten>-lgort
             bwart = '101' BINARY SEARCH.
IF sy-subrc = 0.
    <fs_daten>-wedat = <fs_mseg>-budat.
ENDIF.
READ TABLE lt_mseg ASSIGNING <fs_mseg>
    WITH KEY matnr = <fs_daten>-matnr
             werks = <fs_daten>-werks
             lgort = <fs_daten>-lgort
             bwart = '201' BINARY SEARCH.
IF sy-subrc = 0.
    <fs_daten>-wadat = <fs_mseg>-budat.
ENDIF.
ENDLOOP.

For all entries with 2 internal table

HI experts.
How to use 2 for all entries in a select statement.
Below refer to my below code.
select vbeln matnr lfimg vgbel posnr from lips into corresponding fields of table
it_lips for all entries in it_likp   where
              vbeln = it_likp-vbeln and
              matnr = it_mara-matnr.
I want to add another for all entries it_mara.
Please help me .Thanks in advanced.

hi,
it is possible....
use this query...
declare another internal table of the same type as it_lips.
data : it_lips_final like it_lips.
select vbeln matnr lfimg vgbel posnr from lips into corresponding fields of table
it_lips for all entries in it_likp where
vbeln = it_likp-vbeln .
loop at it_lips.
read table it_mara into it_mara with key matnr = it_lips-matnr.
if sy-subrc = 0.
    append it_lips to it_lips_final.
endif.
endloop.
refresh it_lips[].
it_lips[] = it_lips_final[]
what the above code does is selects all the entries of vbeln from lips and filters it in the loop reading it from mara checking for matnr value and finally
all the entries according to your requirement is there in it_lips_final which we move it to it_lips again...
this is something similar to writing a for all entries for 2 table.... but in another fashion
Regards
Siddarth

Want to Avoid Loop for all entries with select query !!

Hi Guru's !
This is my following code . I want to avoid loop to improve the performance of program.
data: lt_cuhd type HASHED TABLE OF /sapsll/cuhd WITH UNIQUE key guid_cuhd,
      ls_cuhd type /sapsll/cuhd.
data: lt_comments type STANDARD TABLE OF zss_comments,
      ls_comments type zss_comments.
data: lv_objkey type string.
select * from /sapsll/cuhd into table lt_cuhd.
loop at lt_cuhd into ls_cuhd.
CONCATENATE ls_cuhd-corder '%' into lv_objkey. " Example 'Mum%'
select * from zss_comments into table lt_comments
            where objkey like lv_objkey
             AND guid_cuhd = ls_cuhd-guid_cuhd
              AND event_id <> ''.
endloop.
I want
New code should be...using all entries no loop required.
*select * from zss_comments into table lt_comments
            where objkey like lv_objkey
             AND guid_cuhd = ls_cuhd-guid_cuhd
              AND event_id <> ''.*

why dont you add the object key also to lt_cuhd and once you fetch the data to lt_cuhd loop it and add the '%'
when looping use field symbols so that you dont have to use modify.
then use for all entries using lt_cuhd
i don't you can find a better way to add the % mark apart from looping but by this way only one select query will be done for
zss_comments
Thanks
Nafran

Inner join and select for all entries with respect to performance

Hi Friends,
I just want to know which is more efficient with respect to performance the Inner join or select for all entries?which is more efficient? and how? can you explain me in detail ?
Regards,
Dinesh

INNER JOIN->
The data that can be selected with a view depends primarily on whether the view implements an inner join or an outer join. With an inner join, you only get the records of the cross-product for which there is an entry in all tables used in the view. With an outer join, records are also selected for which there is no entry in some of the tables used in the view.
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw2004s/helpdata/en/cf/21ec77446011d189700000e8322d00/content.htm
FOR ALL ENTRIES->
Outer join can be created using this addition to the where clause in a select statement. It speeds up the performance tremendously, but the cons of using this variation are listed below
Duplicates are automatically removed from the resulting data set. Hence care should be taken that the unique key of the detail line items should be given in the select statement.
If the table on which the For All Entries IN clause is based is empty, all rows are selected into the destination table. Hence it is advisable to check before-hand that the first table is not empty.
If the table on which the For All Entries IN clause is based is very large, the performance will go down instead of improving. Hence attempt should be made to keep the table size to a moderate level.
Not Recommended
Loop at int_cntry.
Select single * from zfligh into int_fligh
where cntry = int_cntry-cntry.
Append int_fligh.
Endloop.
Recommended
Select * from zfligh appending table int_fligh
For all entries in int_cntry
Where cntry = int_cntry-cntry.

Inner join and select for all entries with respect to performance in SAP

Hi Friends,
I just want to know which is more efficient with respect to performance the Inner join or select for all entries?which is more efficient?
Regards,
Dinesh

I did some testing a while ago and found that a JOIN is usually a bit more efficient than FOR ALL ENTRIES. This wasn't always the case though, so the best thing to do is to write it both ways and see which is faster.
Rob

For all entries in join conditions

Hi All,
              Can we use for all entries statement in the selection of joining 4 tables.
If so, please give me an example.
Thanks

Hello,
U can use it.
Check this:
* Get the material classification details
SELECT A~CUOBJ A~OBJEK A~KLART B~ATINN B~ATZHL B~ATWRT B~ATFLV
         B~ATAWE B~ATFLB B~ATAW1 C~CLINT D~CLASS
    INTO CORRESPONDING FIELDS OF TABLE G_T_OBJECTS
    FROM INOB AS A INNER JOIN AUSP AS B
      ON A~CUOBJ = B~OBJEK AND
         A~KLART = B~KLART
         INNER JOIN KSSK AS C
         ON B~OBJEK = C~OBJEK AND
            B~KLART = C~KLART
         INNER JOIN KLAH AS D
         ON C~CLINT = D~CLINT
     FOR ALL ENTRIES IN L_T_OBJECT
   WHERE A~OBJEK EQ L_T_OBJECT-OBJEK AND
         A~OBTAB EQ 'MARA' AND
         A~KLART IN S_KLART AND
         B~ADZHL EQ '0000' AND
         C~LKENZ EQ ' '     AND
         D~CLASS IN S_CLASS.
If useful reward.
Vasanth

For all entries with large sets

Hello All,
Does for all entries have restriction that the itab should not exceed the maximum entries? Look at code below:
select pernr raufpl raplzl catshours
         from catsdb
         into corresponding fields of table lit_catshrs
         for all entries in itab
         where pernr = itab-pernr
           and status in ('10', '20', '30')
           and workdate in s_date.
if itab have 7000 entries in production system, will the select statement cause a short dump such as DBIF_RSQL_INVALID_RSQL?
Thanks,
Alex M

Hi,
check the sequence of the fields in the internal table lit_catshrs
Because RSQL error occurs because of this.
and Whenevr you use for all entries of some Internal Table it is a must to check that
IF not ITAB[] Is initial.
< write the select>
endif.
Other performance related thing w.r.t to ABAP are
1) Dont use nested seelct statement
2) If possible use for all entries in addition
3) In the where addition make sure you give all the primary key
4) Use Index for the selection criteria.
5) You can also use inner joins
6) You can try to put the data from the first select statement into an Itab and then in order to select the data from the second table use for all entries in.
7) Use the runtime analysis SE30 and SQL Trace (ST05) to identify the performance and also to identify where the load is heavy, so that you can change the code accordingly
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/5d0db4c9-0e01-0010-b68f-9b1408d5f234
reward if useful
regards,
Anji

Offset in where clause of for all entries

Hi ,
I need to fetch VBELN from VBKD table based on Purchase order no which is fetched from a Z-table.So I am using for all entries with where condition as VBKD-BSTKD_M = Ztable-PONumber and fetching values from VBKD .But at times PO number in VBKD table can have additional things attached to it .
Eg Ztable-PO number = 12345678 , VBKD-BSTKD_M = 12345678-001 so I need to ignore the '-001' part and still fetch data from VBKD.So how can I do that.
Pls let me know if you have any ideas.
Thanks in advance,
Rajasekaran

Hi ,
We cannot use offset directly in where as it will result in syntax error as the field length for both fields have to match .In my case the length of both Ztable -PO number field and vbkd-bstkd_m are 35 characters.So cannot use offset directly in where clause of for all entries.
Pls let me know if you have any other ideas.
Thanks in advance,
Rajsekaran

FOR ALL ENTRIES... with FIELD SYMBOL

Is it possible to use FOR ALL ENTRIES with a FIELD-SYMBOL that points to a data reference of type STANDARD TABLE ?
I have the following:
SELECT * FROM mara
    INTO TABLE table
    FOR ALL ENTRIES IN another_table
    WHERE matnr EQ another_table-matnr.
The code above is what exists, (working), but I'm improving the program and one of the improvements is to allow dynamic querying by providing a field symbol instead of a hard-coded table like "another_table". But I get the message "the specified type has no structure and therefore no component called "MATNR".
My code just have the field symbol that points to a previously data reference created for a table passed as a parameter (this is working, having checked via debugging) replacing "another_table" and <fs>-matnr instead of "another_table-matnr".
What solutions would you guys suggest ?
Thanks
Avraham

Why is that that the commented line doesn't work, but under debugging I can reach <ls_items>-matnr ?
Everything is fine with <lt_items>, it contains 8 lines, and debugging shows <ls_items> receiving one line each loop pass, just as expected. I wanted to understand why/when does this error of "has no structure therefore there is no component"... appears.
LOOP AT <lt_items> INTO <ls_items>.
*    SELECT SINGLE * INTO ls_mara FROM mara WHERE mara~matnr = <ls_items>-matnr.
    IF sy-subrc = 0.
      APPEND ls_mara TO lt_mara.
    ENDIF.
ENDLOOP.

About for all entries

can u give the information abt the FOR ALL ENTRIES and the conditions.

HI
GOOD
Use of FOR ALL Entries
Outer join can be created using this addition to the where clause in a select statement. It speeds up the performance tremendously, but the cons of using this variation are listed below
Duplicates are automatically removed from the resulting data set. Hence care should be taken that the unique key of the detail line items should be given in the select statement.
If the table on which the For All Entries IN clause is based is empty, all rows are selected into the destination table. Hence it is advisable to check before-hand that the first table is not empty.
If the table on which the For All Entries IN clause is based is very large, the performance will go down instead of improving. Hence attempt should be made to keep the table size to a moderate level.
Not Recommended
            Loop at int_cntry.
             Select single * from zfligh into int_fligh
where cntry = int_cntry-cntry.
Append int_fligh.
            Endloop.
Recommended
            Select * from zfligh appending table int_fligh
            For all entries in int_cntry
            Where cntry = int_cntry-cntry.
GO THROUGH THESE LINKS
http://www.thespot4sap.com/articles/SAPABAPPerformanceTuning_ForAllEntries.asp
CODE
Code to demonstrate Select FOR ALL ENTRIES command
The FOR ALL ENTRIES comand only retrieves data which matches
entries within a particular internal table.
TYPES: begin of t_bkpf,
include structure bkpf.
bukrs like bkpf-bukrs,
belnr like bkpf-belnr,
gjahr like bkpf-gjahr,
BLDAT like bkpf-BLDAT,
monat like bkpf-monat,
budat like bkpf-budat,
xblnr like bkpf-xblnr,
awtyp like bkpf-awtyp,
awkey like bkpf-awkey,
end of t_bkpf.
data: it_bkpf type standard table of t_bkpf initial size 0,
      wa_bkpf type t_bkpf.
TYPES: begin of t_bseg,
*include structure bseg.
bukrs     like bseg-bukrs,
belnr     like bseg-belnr,
gjahr     like bseg-gjahr,
buzei     like bseg-buzei,
mwskz     LIKE bseg-mwskz,         "Tax code
umsks     LIKE bseg-umsks,         "Special G/L transaction type
prctr     LIKE bseg-prctr,         "Profit Centre
hkont     LIKE bseg-hkont,         "G/L account
xauto     like bseg-xauto,
koart     like bseg-koart,
dmbtr     like bseg-dmbtr,
mwart     like bseg-mwart,
hwbas     like bseg-hwbas,
aufnr     like bseg-aufnr,
projk     like bseg-projk,
shkzg     like bseg-shkzg,
kokrs     like bseg-kokrs,
end of t_bseg.
data: it_bseg type standard table of t_bseg initial size 0,
      wa_bseg type t_bseg.
select bukrs belnr gjahr BLDAT monat budat xblnr awtyp awkey
up to 100 rows
from bkpf
into table it_bkpf.
if sy-subrc EQ 0.
select bukrs belnr gjahr buzei mwskz umsks prctr hkont xauto koart
         dmbtr mwart hwbas aufnr projk shkzg kokrs
    from bseg
    into table it_bseg
    FOR ALL ENTRIES in it_bkpf
    where bukrs eq it_bkpf-bukrs and
          belnr eq it_bkpf-belnr and
          gjahr eq it_bkpf-gjahr.
endif.
CODE
You can only use FOR ALL ENTRIES IN ...WHERE ...in a SELECT statement.
    SELECT ... FOR ALL ENTRIES IN itab WHERE cond returns the union of the solution sets of all SELECT
    statements that would result if you wrote a separate statement for each line of the internal table replacing the symbol
    itab-f with the corresponding value of component f in the WHERE condition.Duplicates are discarded from the result
    set. If the internal table itab does not contain any entries, the system treats the statement as though there were
    no WHERE cond condition, and selects all records (in the current client).
    for example:
       SELECT * FROM sflight INTO wa_sflight
                 FOR ALL ENTRIES IN ftab
                 WHERE CARRID = ftab-carrid AND
                  CONNID = ftab-connid AND
                         fldate = '20010228'.
    this condition, return all entries of the sflight
THANKS
MRUTYUN

Inner joins Vs for all entries

Hi All,
Pls let me know
the differences b/w innerjoins and for all entries,,,,which is the best option and Y??
Thanks in Advance,
Bye

Hi!
INNER JOIN is used if we want to retrieve some data from more than one table.
FOR ALL ENTRIES is used if we want some data from a table based on some conditions of some other table.
Using several nested INNER JOIN statements can be inefficient and cause time out if the tables become too big in the future."
In ABAP, these joins are first split by the ABAP processor and then sent to the database, with the increase in DATA in production system, these joins tend to give way if your database keeps growing larger and larger.
You should rather use "FOR ALL ENTRIES IN" (Tabular conditions), which is a much efficient way as far as performance is concerned.
Check these links:
inner joins and for all entries
inner join and for all entries
Reward points if it helps.
Regards
Sudheer

2 for all entries with different condition

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for