A/c assignment analysis

Hi friends,
while doing billing(VF01) i am not getting any error,but if i go for VF02-Environmentaccount determination analysis---Reconsilation account, i am getting following error "account assignment analysis cannot be carried out for billing type ZF2"
pls give the soluation
thanks

hi,
In vf02---> u have click reconcilliation account ---. normally billing documenmt will not have that
u have to click REVENUE ACCOUNTS for account determination ananlysis
hope this help u else please revert
regards,
Arun prasad

Similar Messages

Read Only Access while assigning Analysis Types and Reports in User/Group

Hi Team,
While Assigning Analysis Type,Reports and Workbooks to User "Read" option is not enabled. It is not working and as soon as we select analysis type ,Only one option is editable "Create/Update/Delete". The other two Option is always there as display "Read" and "Execute" . Execute might work with "Scripts template" but "READ" should work for analysis types and Reports.
We are already struggling with "Read Only" Access in security filter as its not working now.
Thanks
Edited by: user7918731 on Mar 2, 2011 11:22 AM

The behavior for Analysis type, workbook and script as follow:-
The Analysis type create/update/delete option will be enabled, read and execute option will be disabled by default.
The report workbook read option will be enabled, and other two options will be disabled.
The script execute option will be enabled, and other two option’s will be disabled.
For providing “Read Only” access in security filter, Switch to the administration tab, Click on Security Filters, Click on Add button, Open Create Security Filter window, Select the access level to Read Only and select user in assigned user , Click on ok.
It should work.

BI analysis authorisations direct assign to user in RSECADMIN

Hello,
In RSECADMIN it is possible to directly assign the 'analysis authorisations' to user-id's
It is also possible to assign the 'analysis authorisations' to a role via the authorisation object S_RS_AUTH
Can somebody tell me
-    what are the pros and cons of directly assigning the analysis autorisations to the users in the RSECADMIN ?
-    In which situation is direct assigning in RSECADMIN used ?
-     IS dirtectly assigning to users in RSECADMIN in a production environment critical?
-     what does SAP propose: directly assigning in analysis authorisations our via a role
In our case we have the situation of
       BI system with a large number of analysis authorisations. The values of the analysis authorisations should be
       maintainable in production environment.
       We have also to take in mind:
                          - Roles are added to users via CUA ( RSECADMIN is not maintainable via CUA)
                          - Business Objects is coming. So set up the authorisations that they can be used for Business Objects
                          - Flexible ( new autorisation relevant info Objects) should be easy adeptable.
       What we want to use is
                                 - assigning analysis authorisations via a single role ( in a composite ) to the user
                                 - a variable in the analysis authorisations as field value of a characteristic. In that case the values can be
                                    assigned dynamically in production.
                                   the data access role has the link to the analysis autorisations in the RSECADMIN.
                                  this analysis authorisation contains variables instead of a fixed field value.
                                  The values of the variables are maintained in a table in a production environment
         Is using directly assigning analysis authorisations to users in the RSECADMIN in the production environment an alternative ?
    Thanks for your answers
    With Kind Regards,
    Vincent
Edited by: Vincent Willems on Apr 7, 2011 10:37 AM

Hello Vincent,
My way of working is to follow the structure you have in the providing systems. If you have created a role for a production employee then try to translate the roles for the production analysis the same way in BI. You can use the s_rs_auth object. In HR you can use structural authorizations, you can use some programs to set the structural authorizations in BI and that will be done by creating an analysis object and add this to the user involved. Also updates from structural authorizations will be done automatically by these programs. I should not add your own objects to single users, that is a lot of maintenance you do not want. Use in BI the same concept as in the providing systems, it is more clear for anyone who has to work with it.
Have fun
Bye
Jan van Roest
PS. Did you solve your problem? If so please close your question
Edited by: J. van Roest on Jul 7, 2011 12:51 PM

Analysis Authorization not working - Empty demarcation

Can someone help me on this Analysis Authorization? I read many threads in SDN, it seems that I followed the correct steps. The restriction on S_RS_COMP is working well but the restriction on the Analysis Authorization is not working. Surely I'm making some mistake, but can't find what's wrong.
I'm a User (say USER_00) in a test system, assigned to a Role (say Z:BI_USER). This is a broad role:
- S_RS_COMP and S_RS_COMP1 have full authorization (*) to all the fields,
- S_RS_AUTH has the BIAUTH field with Name of Authorization = *.
Also I have an InfoArea (ZIA_TEST) and an InfoCube (ZIC_TEST). The IC has some characteristics and key figures. The only authorization relevant characteristic is ZCA_CLI (client). The IC has only 5 lines, one for each client ("CLI_01" to "CLI_05").
Also there's a query (ZQR_TEST) on this IC, with an Authorization Variable (VAR_AUTH_CLI) restricting the characteristic ZCA_CLI.
I'm trying to create a new User and restrict him to this IC and only to the data of client "CLI_01". If it works I'll apply to a production system.
What I did:
1) With tcode SU01 created a new User (USER_01) with no Role neither Analysis Authorization.
2) With tcode PFCG copied the Role Z:BI_USER as Z:ROLE_TEST then made some changes:
a) S_RS_COMP
- Activity = 03 and 16
- InfoArea = ZIA_TEST
- InfoCube = ZIC_TEST
- Type of report component = *
- Name of report component = *.
b) S_RS_COMP1
- Kept * to all fields.
c) S_RS_AUTH
- I inactivated and deleted this Authorization Object.
(I don't want to keep characteristic values restriction inside the role. The idea is to associate different users to the same role, allowing them to see the same ICs and execute the same queries. And differentiate wich characteristic values each one can see by manually associating different analysis authorization to each one.).
3) With tcode RSECAUTH I created an Analysis Authorization (Z_AA_CLI_01) to restrict access only to client "CLI_01":
- ZCA_CLI = "CLI_01"
- 0TCAACTVT = "03"
- 0TCAIPROV = "ZIC_TEST"
- 0TCAVALID = "*".
4) With tcode PFCG I assigned User "USER_01" to the Role " Z:ROLE_TEST" and made Complete Comparison.
5) With tcode RSU01 I manually assigned Analysis Authorization " Z_AA_CLI_01" to User "USER_01".
It seems to me that these steps are enough. But:
a) When I log as USER_00 and go to tcode RSRT2, searching by InfoAreas I can see all the InfoAreas and all the InfoCubes, select and execute the query. That's OK.
b) When I log as USER_01 and go to RSRT2, searching by InfoAreas I can see only ZIA_TEST and under it I can see only ZIC_TEST. That's OK. Then I select and execute the query.
Wich means that S_RS_COMP is OK and each user is assigned to the correct Role.
c) The problem is that in both cases the query brings data from all Clients.
Under Information and Variable Values (when I run with HTML display) the message is "Empty demarcation".
I changed the variable to be Ready for Input, just to see wich values it brings. In both cases (as USER_00 and as USER_01) in the Variable Screen it brings all the 5 Clients from the IC and I can select and execute any value.
So the problem is with the Analysis Authorization or with the Variable, but I can't find what's wrong.
Any help will be very appreciated.
César

OK Marc, it worked.
Sorry for not answering earlier, but I could get back to this front only some days ago, then began testing your suggestions.
1) Security Concept
Authorization Mode was set to "Obsolete Concept with RSR Authorization Objects" (it would never work with this setting).
I changed to "Current Procedure with Analysis Authorizations".
Anyway, what's the function of this setting? Do old Reporting Authorizations work with "Current Procedure with Analysis Authorizations" setting?
2) Variable Representation
With "Multiple Single Values" it really led to problems.
With "Selection Option" it worked well.
3) 0TCAKYFNM
I don't understand why, but if the AA doesn't have the char/dimension 0TCAKYFNM, when the User tries to run the query (tcode RSRT2) it accuses "You do not have sufficient authorization".
Info Cube ZIC_VE95 has two KFs (ZKF_QTL95 and ZKF_VLT95). These KFs are used only on this IC (also in the KF Catalog, but it doesn't impact). This IC is used only on Query ZQR_VE95 (also in Transformation and DTP, wich doesn't impact).
Well, I inserted 0TCAKYFNM and it worked, either with CP, "*" or with EQ, the two KFs.
4) Authorization Policy Definition
The situation I'm working on is very typical. Ex.: Some users are Administrators, Managers, Operator 1, Operator 2 and so on. Each Role needs authorization to access some queries. At the same time, they can access information only of the Cost Centers to wich they are related.
There are many ways to implement it (I tested some of them and they worked well). My point is to define a most practical way, easy to understand and to maintain.
I'm now sympathetic to this way:
a) Create functional Roles (ex.: "Administrator", "Manager", "Operator 1", "Operator 2" and so on) defining only the Queries (or Info Areas, Info Providers, etc) each Role needs. No S_RS_AUTH definition.
b) Create Char Value Roles (ex.: "CC_100_to_199", "CC_200_to_299", etc), only with S_RS_AUTH definition, each one associated with a corresponding AA (ex.: AA for CC 100 to 199, AA for CC 200 to 299 and so on).
c) Create Composite Roles associating functional and char value Roles. Ex. Composite Role "Administrator for CC 100 to 199", composed of the Roles "Administrator" and "CC_100_to_199".
d) Associate Users to the Composite Roles.
Anyway, I'd appreciate if you could indicate some literature (blogs, articles, etc) on this theme.
Well, thank you very much for your answers. Now I can go on with my studies on this subject.
César Menezes

Change documents or logs for Analysis authorisation access changes

Is there a way to review the change history or table logs in BI 7.0 to show who assigned analysis authorizations and when it was assigned or removed? I presume there should be a SUIM change document that shows the Analysis authorization access changes that are assigned directly to users via RSU01 or RESEADMIN when these analysis authorizations are not included in roles.
An example area of concern is with the assignment of 0BI_ALL, having an accurate log or mechanism to track the assignments to users.

Hi Srinivas,
you can activate in DDIC that your entry changes will be logged.
Go to SE11 -> Your Tablenname -> CHANGE
Button TechnicalSettings -> Activate checkbox Log data changes.
From now on any chenge will be logged in table DBTABLOG.
Kind Regards
Henner

About account assignment error

when i am Releasing Credit Memo to Billing
i am getting this type of error
Account assignment analysis cannot be carried out for billing type G2
regards
raj K

Dear Friend,
The account analysis is only possible if you have assigned a G/L accounts for your transactions of Billing type G2.
Ckeck VK0A.
here you check your pricing condition types account keys and G/l Assignments.
after doing so check your billing documents of G2 type you will be able to do account analysis.
regards,
Amlan Sarkar

Authorization Issue while Data Preview from HANA View

Hi Experts,
We are using BW on HANA. We have created DSOs (info provider) in BW and generated HANA views from there. We have also created analysis authorizations in BW for authorization relevant characteristics. In HANA, we are able to go to the generated analytic view and preview the data from it successfully.
Now I have created a test user and assigned a custom role with below authorizations to this user in HANA:
- bw2hana/../REPORTING role (this role is automatically created by activation of DSO in BW).
- Roles MODELING, MONITORING, CONTENT_ADMIN, USER.
- Multiple system privileges although not needed, like REPO.EXPORT, REPO.IMPORT, etc.
- Analytic Privilege _SYS_BI_CP_ALL
- Package Privilege: REPO.READ for all required packages (tried with ROOT package also).
In BW system also, the test user has analysis authorizations providing access to the relevant info objects.
But when I am trying to preview data for HANA view, I am getting attached error (also listed below):
"Cannot get the data provider outline
SAP DBTech JDBC: [2048]: Column store error: Search table error: [2950] user is not authorized"
I tried to trace the situation is HANA and got below details in 2 trace files:
indexserver_alert_saphana.trc:
[6433]{416977}[66/-1] 2014-10-14 00:59:27.541187 e CalcEngine ceAuthorizationCheck.cpp(02365) : AuthorizationCheckHandler::addAPsToSearchObject: Error during converting SqlAPs to Query entries
indexserver_saphana.31003.075.trc
[6433]{416977}[66/-1] 2014-10-14 00:59:27.541197 i TraceContext TraceContext.cpp(00702) : UserName=TEST_SSO, ApplicationUserName=<<computer name >>, ApplicationName=HDBStudio, ApplicationSource=csns.modeler.datapreview.providers.ResultSetDelegationDataProvider.<init>(ResultSetDelegationDataProvider.java:118);csns.modeler.actions.DataPreviewDelegationAction.getDataProvider(DataPreviewDelegationAction.java:278);csns.modeler.actions.DataPreviewDelegationAction.run(DataPreviewDelegationAction.java:242);csns.modeler.actions.DataPreviewDelegationAction.run(DataPreviewDelegationAction.java:127);csns.modeler.command.handlers.DataPreviewHandler.execute(DataPreviewHandler.java:53);org.eclipse.core.commands
[6433]{416977}[66/-1] 2014-10-14 00:59:27.541187 e CalcEngine ceAuthorizationCheck.cpp(02365) : AuthorizationCheckHandler::addAPsToSearchObject: Error during converting SqlAPs to Query entries
Do you know what this "Error during converting SqlAPs to Query entries" actually means"? How can we resolve this issue? The authorization is working properly for our user ids. But we need to provide restricted access for business users so trying to create test user and custom role.
Thanks
Nitesh Gupta

Hi Pinaki and Prabhith,
Yes, my issue was resolved. Sorry, missed to updated here.
I was just a beginer for BW on HANA Security at that time and didn't know many small things. The solution was pretty simple.
Whenever you assign analysis authorizations to a user in BW, you also need to generate corresponding HANA authorization. This is done through tcode RS2HANA_CHECK tcode. This tcode converts BW analysis authorizations into HANA analysis authorizations and assign to the HANA user. You can see generated HANA authorization table RS2HANA_AUTH_STR in both BW and HANA.
Once the HANA authorizations are successfully generated for a user, he should be able to see data from Views.
Let me know if this solves issues. Then I will close this thread.
Thanks

Error while creating excise invoice for no bond

Hi,
Iam creating export excise invoice which is related to NO BOND, while saving the document iam getting the error "No account is specified in item 0000000001" in diagnosis iam getting "No account was specified for account type "S" in item "0000000001" of the FI/CO document.".
Kindly suggest me how to solve this issue.
Thanks in advance
V S Kumar

hi
check u r pricing procedure
whether g/l accounts assigned and also check u r revenu account determiantion settings
try to read the above said OSS notes
this error comes because
Item nnnnnnnn is the item number assigned by accounting.
When a billing document is transferred, a G/L account (account type 'S') is
missing for this item.
The problem is caused by incorrect Customizing in account determination:
the access of the G/L account via a condition table of account
determination is successful, however, in the corresponding table, no G/L
account is stored!
The account assignment analysis shows (for example).:
PR00 price 120 G/L account determined from account assignment type
KOFI
Solution
Use the account assignment analysis to check account assignment in the
billing document.
For the corresponding condition table of account assignment, maintain the
missing G/L accounts.
regards

Credit Memo - Accounting Document is not generating

Hi,
I have created a Credit Memo and removed billing block in VA02.
Now, in VF01 i generated the billing document. But the Accounting Document is not generated.
In VF02, when tried to do "Release to Accounts", it says " An Accounting document is not required for this Billing Document"
When checked the Pricing conditions in billing, at Header level there is no Value. But in detail level there is value for all condition types.
Also, during billing in VF01, when tried to check "Account Determination Analysisi - Reconcilliation Accounts", it says error message as "Accounting assignment analysis cannot be carried out for this Billing Type"
Can you please help me out on this.
Regards,
Ramki

Hi,
Please check the reason for value not flowing to the header data of the billing document.Once you get the value of the document tin the header , there will be no issue in creating an accounting document.
Check the item category of the credit memo.
Regards,
Phani Prasad

Re: Missing G/L Account in Sales Order

Hi all,
I have a BOM material configured and now I am creating a Sales Order with the BOM Material in order to trigger the Production of the goods.
I have looked in most of the forums and checked that VKOA assignment is there. Even in the Acct Assignment analysis, the G/L account is determined, but yet it is showing "Missing Data: G/L Account" in the analysis.
What else could there be to maintain?
Pls assist.
Thanks.
Rgds.

Hi,
Please check whether you have maintained the account key for the condition type in your pricing procedure in V/08.
Also go through the below post it will help you to resolve your issue.
Re: Missing GL account in sales order transaction
Regards,
Krishna O

Error in Account determination , Message no VR012

Dear Experts
help me in solving this issue
In vfx3 when iam releasing the billing document to accounting it giving error " Error in Account determination", if i double click on that error, it giving message VR012,
Thanks in Advance
Thanks & regards
Chand

Please check your VKOA settings .
Please check account keys are properly maintained with sales area,Account Assginment groups(customer,material) and condtions.
Symptom
The revenue account determination during billing does not determine the correct account although all Customizing settings were checked and are correct.
The account assignment analysis on the detail screen displays the information:
VE120 "G/L account xxx determined from Account determination type kkk",
VE215 "G/L account in document: yyy"
The two specified G/L accounts xxx and yyy differ from each other, especially the G/L account yyy in the document is incorrect, however the G/L account xxx determined from account determination type kkk is correct.
The problem occurs when fields of the billing header (for example, billing type, field VBRK-FKART) are used as criterion for the revenue account determination and are billed in collective processing.
The error does not occur if billing is restricted to one document.
check notes:
Note 172692 - Error in the revenue account determination
Note 212909 - Posting status B (account assignment error) not set

Pricing error (Message no. VF073) Accounting Document not generated

Dear All,
User has entered delivery quantity as 0.00 in one of the line item (007) without material description in vl01n and saved. Invoice number has also been generated. Because of Pricing error for the line item( 007) Accounting Document is not getting generated.
My issue is without cancellation of invoice/configuration changes, can i delete the line item (007) or is there any alternative solution to create accounting document.
Note: line item( 007) does not have details only quantity is mention 0.00 in VL01n.
Experts please help me how to solve this issue.

hi
please check the account assignment group for material, go to vf02 and check line item , , click on menu bar environment -account assignment analysis-revenue accounts , here you will check you base condition type data , once click on condition type , system which data is missing , now you can enter ,

Consuming and exposing services in IdM?

Hello there, I have several requirements in my IdM project that cannot be satisfied by the standard SAP provisioning framework and I was wondering if it would be possible to instead expose some functionality in the target system as services and consume these services inside javascripts? An example is the handling of structural authorizations which in our company is a little more complex than elsewhere. I should be able to represent structural profiles as privileges in IdM, but with the standard SAP provisioning framework I am not able to provision the profiles. A similar challenge exists with analysis authorizations in BI. I should be able to represent these authorizations as privileges, but I need a way to provision assigned analysis authorizations.
My idea is to conceal the functionality I need in the back end system in a web service which I would then like to be able to consume in a javascript in a script run in IdM. Is this possible?
Similarly for some automated assignements of data access profiles, I would like to be able to determine inside a javascript what part of the organization a user belongs to. Our current setup is that we push data from HCM into a staging area inside the Identity Center through the use of the VDS. The employee data that is received from HCM is used when determinining which users should be setup in the target systems. Would I need to enrich the extract of data from HCM to include the organizational model and represent it in the HCM staging area or would it be a better approach to expose services in HCM that could be consumed from inside IdM?
Exposing services in IdM is another topic. I seem to have read somewhere that it is possible to expose stored procedures in the underlying database (SQLserver) as web services, but do I have similar functionality for tasks and jobs in IdM?
Best regards,
Anders

Best practice seems to be to configure the Identity Services as a document here on SDN describes. ./Anders

Invoice configuration issue

Hi Friends,
We are now creating delivery based on contract (VA31). Invoice is created with reference to delivery. When we do so, we always get the tax determined in invoice from the customer master.
Now our requriment is, we want to create Intercompany invoice using the same contract, Here the tax should we determine based on the vendor originating country.
Can any one give any idea how to configure it or is this possible ? How can we change the tax code in the invoice to a manually updated one ?

hi
please check the account assignment group for material, go to vf02 and check line item , , click on menu bar environment -account assignment analysis-revenue accounts , here you will check you base condition type data , once click on condition type , system which data is missing , now you can enter ,

IS- retail sale posting error

hi all,
i am doing sale posting through BD87 inbound POS , but it;s throwing error
document saved ,(VF051) error in account determination -matrial uknown
i have mantained accnt grp in MM42 also there is account assignement done for account kye which is attached on condition type in OB40. also cheked in VOKA . everything is mantained still it's giving error VF051
Is there any other setting required to remove the error
pls advice
regards,
praful

Hi Prafulla,
The system should transfer the billing document immediately to financial accounting. However, your settings in account determination are incorrect. Therefore, you have to maintain;
Maintain the G/L account assignment (Transaction VKOA) so that the system is always able to find an account. Then the system can create the billing document and you can use account assignment analysis.
Or
If all billing documents which are transferred to FI should have a CO account assignment, then you have to ensure organizationally that credit memos, debit memos, returns are only created with reference to documents with a CO account assignment.
If there can be documents without CO account assignment then you have to:
a) either remove requirement 2 from the account determination
b) or enter a second account determination type in the procedure which ensures that the required accounts can also be found for such transactions.
Bye,
Muralidhara

A/c assignment analysis

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for