Amount of transaction

hi
how can I know the amount of transaction in one table, or more than one tables.Is it possible to monitor transaction amount?
I want to have an idea about which tables in the system applied transaction most !!!

You can query global number of transactions at session level or instance level using the statistics 4 and 5 in 10g release 2:
select statistic#, name from v$statname where name like 'user%';STATISTIC# NAME
         4 user commits
         5 user rollbacks
         6 user calls
        17 user I/O wait timeHowever, to get details at table level, you could also use LogMiner.

Similar Messages

Amount display transaction VK13

VK13.
I am looking at a certain condition record in transaction VK13, when i see the output in the table control in the amount field i have a percentage value e.g. 2 and in the unit fields i have '%'.
The amount value is picked from the table KONP-KBETR and unit reference field is KONP-KONWA.
the value in the table KONP for KBETR is 20 and for KONWA is '%'.
So when it display's on the screen instead of 20 it displays 2..... when i checked the sap standard table control behind it Program SAPMV13A screen 1912 for the amount field the reference field is RV13A-KONWA
RV13A-KONWA is populated as 3 at this point... during the display the vakue is converted,
My questions:
1. Where does it get the value 3 from ? and what is it about.
My problem..
I am picking up the data and trying to display using alv grid..over there even if i use the reference field as the KONWA field.. i dont get 2 as a value?
So gurus i am sure someone has come across this before.. some light on this please ...
Thanks

SAP assigns hardcoded 3 to currency key incase of percentage assignments...
I should be able to assign 10 points to myself for this

KE5Z - Amounts in transaction currency

Hi,
I am using 6.0 version. I am trying to view the actual PC line items using KE5Z.
But, the field "In transaction currency" is Blank.
In PC settings (0KE5) , i have maintained PCtr Local Currency Type as "20" (Controlling area currency)
I tried using FAGLL03 - as an alternative report, But i need some other fields like Vendor Name, Entry time & date which are not available in FAGLL03.
Moreover, we run the reports based on Profit Centers in KE5Z and this is not feasible in FAGLL03 where Co Code is a compulsory field.
Please advise me, why the "transaction currency" is not pulled in KE5Z ?
Thanks,
Pavan.

Hello,
In PCA settings 0KE5, you have not checked "Store Transaction Currency".
Make sure before checking this tick, the system write in two currencies and it will have negative impace on the performance if you have large volume of data. Only if it is particularly required, then you check it.
Read F1 Help:
Store transaction currency in EC-PCA
This indicator controls whether or not the transaction currency is updated when actual or plan data is transferred from other components to Profit Center Accounting.
Setting this flag increases the data volume, since the totals records need to be broken down according to the transaction currency.
The indicator has no effect on direct entry of data in Profit Center Accounting. If a corresponding layout is used, values can be entered or planned in the transaction currency, even if the indicator has not been set here.
Regards,
Ravi

BC Does not have an e-commerce "transaction id" or "amount" to call upon?

I'm working on integrating a third party ecommerce affiliate solution into my client's web site.
The software has a solution that auto-configures itself depending on whcih CMS you're using however Business Catalyst is not among them. Thankfully it offers a "general" option that allows you to custom configure it based on the intricacies of that unsupported CMS.
In addition to one other step which was easy, the software requires that I integrate a small script on the ecommerce "thank you" page and requires that I update it with a "transaction id" (or order id) as well as a field designating the "amount".
Unfortunately these two bits of information are not within BC anywhere (that I can see) that would allow me to call upon them.
Adobe Business Catalyst tech support says that this "could be addressed with some javascript" but (as they put it) "HTML / CSS / Javascript are outside the scope of our support boundaries"
BC tech support reqcomended that I post my problem / question here in the forums in hopes that a kind soul would take pity on me and either help me create the javascript in question or help me find an alternate solution.
I dont know if it helps but here is the script:
<script>
function hideIF() {
document.getElementById('IF').style.display = '';
function getSaleInfo() {
document.getElementById('st_code').innerHTML='<iframe src="https://truth180.myomnistar.com/salejs.php?amount=15&transaction=B" alt="" id=IF width=50 height=50 border="0" frameborder="0" onload="hideIF()">';
window.onload = getSaleInfo;
</script>
<div id="st_code"></div>

You should be putting this script into the Order Receipt layout. You can find it by navigation your website FTP in Layouts > Online Shop > order_receipt-US.html (providing US is your base country for eCommerce). Once you download that file via FTP, edit that file. On that layout you have access to two tags which should help you out: {tag_amount} and {tag_orderid} will give you the full amount of the order and a unique order id, respectively.
You'll probably want to add those to your order receipt layout like:
<script>
function hideIF() {
document.getElementById('IF').style.display = '';
function getSaleInfo() {
document.getElementById('st_code').innerHTML='<iframe src="https://truth180.myomnistar.com/salejs.php?amount={tag_amount}&transaction={tag_orderid}" alt="" id=IF width=50 height=50 border="0" frameborder="0" onload="hideIF()">';
window.onload = getSaleInfo;
</script>
<div id="st_code"></div>
You'll notice I replaced the "15" and "B" with the tags I mentioned above.
Good luck
thetrickster

Amount of max possible simultaneous INSERTs depend on what ??

Hi all,
can somebody comment on following statement , whether its is absolutely true, only a part of the truth or completely wrong :
"The maximum possible amount of transactions that are simultaneously performing inserts into an Oracle- table is MAINLY constrained by the available ITL-slots of that table." (Assumption : Hardware performance identical)
Background : We have a mission critical table where every user performs inserts (some kind of an audit table). These inserts are part of the original business transaction and are -normally- very fast.
Problem is that the commit of the original business txn is only issued after populating this audit table.
We were asked how many hanging user transactions would be required in order to completely lock the table for further inserts and as a consequence completely hangup the application.
Cheers,
Mig

mbobak wrote:
2.) You didn't mention version, or whether you're using ASSM, but, if you're still using MSSM (free list managment), then you'll need to consider freelists as well. The freelists parameter should be set to the max concurrent number of inserts on a segment.
Mark,
I wasn't planning to go into details about how to configure the number of blocks available for insertion, but you're right: freelists is a significant setting, as is freelist groups. ASSM is roughly equivalent to just freelists 16 freelist groups 1 - which is why systems with very high rates of concurrent DML should seriously consider avoiding it.
P.S. Come to think of it, you're more likely to have trouble from buffer busy waits before you run into problems with ITL waits if you try increasing insertion concurrency by setting a high INITRANS.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
"Science is more than a body of knowledge; it is a way of thinking" Carl Sagan

G/L error while posting an amount - TXN: FPE1 - SAP ISU

Hello Experts,
We are in the process of implementing SAP ISU functionality for a utility client. In order to support their utility process we are configuring their SAP System from scratch.
Now after completing basic configuration such as main-sub, AD ID, G/L I tried to post amount using transaction FPE1.
SAP system gave me error saying that u2018Account COCODE G/LXXX is not a reconciliation account for FI-CAu2019.
So after reading few threads on SDN I updated G/L account and changed its field value for u2018Recon account for account typeu2019 from blank to u2018contract account receivableu2019.
Then after doing this I tried again but system now game me an another error saying 'G/L account COCODE G/LXXX cannot be posted to, please correct your entry i.e. This G/L account is blocked against posting or is a reconciliation account and cannot be posted to directly'.
What should I do now? I am damn sure I missed some ISU configuration. Please suggest some way out.
P.S. I am not a G/L expert so if possible please be detailed.
Thanks for your help.

Hi,
This is a very basic problem.
To start with, when you post a FI-CA document through FPE1 using a particular combination of main\sub, then two types of GL A/c comes into picture-
Reconciliation Account, like Debtors A/c
Revenue Account, like Sales A/c
The reconciliation account is configured in transaction EK01 against the combination of company code, AD ID, Div (Not necessary) and main transaction.
The revenue account is confgured in transaction EK02 against the combination of company code, AD ID, Div (Not necessary) main transaction and subtransaction.
You have made the correct changes for the initial error by changing ther GL A/c field value for u2018Recon account for account typeu2019 from blank to u2018contract account receivableu2019.
Now for the latest error that you are getting check whether the GL A/c that you have configured in EK02 is a revenue account or not.
A very simple approach would be to take the GL A/c and go to FS00 and check the account group.
If it is a " P&L Statement A/c", then its a revenue account, other wise not.
In Ek02, it will always be a revenue account for any non-statistical posting,
If all above things are perfect, then check the cost element associated with the GL A/c.
Hope it helps..
Thanks,
Amlan

Partical amount transfer through ABUMN

Hi,
By mistake we have created the asset master data with wrong cost center and plant and posted the entry of acquisition in 30.06.2008 for Rs 100000. The opening balance of this asset is on 01.04.2008 is NIL
Later on we have discovered the mistake and now we want to rectify the partial amount say 60000/-.
Hence through transaction code ABUMN, we have created another asset and try to post the partial amount. While doing so the message No: AA416 appears:
Retirement of old assets data not possible (No existing old assets data)
Diagnosis:
You have tried to post an retirement based on amount using transaction type which refers to old assets data (acquisitions from previous year)
However, the sum of the APC at the start of the fiscal year and the transactions, related to the past, equals 0.
Procedure:
Check the transaction type entered and the asset.
Please give the solution how to post the partial amount through transaction code ABUMN.
Regards,
Babjee

hi,
select from current acquisation year.
govind

Extended Withholding Tax ( Minimum/maximum Base Amount ) - with accumulati

We are facing problem in posting of vendor Invoice. Actually we have implemented Minimum base amount ( Rs. 75000/- ) at withholding tax type level and accumulation at per year in withholding tax type A1 ( for testing purpose ) and assign the same to a vendor. We have booked some invoices up to RS. 75000/- system working fine, no WHT is deducted. But now we have received a another Invoice Rs. 5000/- and at the time of booking of invoice system giving an error message
I have changed the error message to warning but itu2019s again showing the same error message.
Actually the problem is system calculate the WHT from the beginning of the year to till date and the amount of Vendor invoice is less the than the amount of WHT but itu2019s legal requirement and we have to post the financial entry as mentioned below
Fictitious figures
Vendor Account           Dr.           Rs,      1500.00     ( Debit instead of credit )
Expense Account           Dr.           Rs.      5000.00     ( Actual exp. Of Invoice )
WHT Payable Account            Cr.           Rs.      6500.00     ( Total WHT from the beginning
Please provide the any.
SAP reply
Dear Customer,
We understand your requirement. But the standard SAP system does not support a scenario where an invoice amount in lower than the tax amount.
This is not a localization specific requirement. The accumulation logic is a generic system behaviour and all countries use it. We cannot make any change in the standard in this regard and change the current system behaviour.
Option to handle this in the system
The only way this can be handled in the system is once the accumulation limit has been reached, use a separate tax type tax code with out accumulations.
Though this is not the ideal solution, this is the best possible solution for your requirement.
Accumulation is not localized for India and the standard solution vailable for all the countries is used by Indian customers too.
SAP is currently not looking at any enhancements to this feature.
Other than the option mentioned above, there is no other way of handling this in the system.
Best Regards,
Soumya
If any one have any otehr solution please inform us.

This cannot be possible for two reasons.
1. If you are not able to recover the amount from the Vendor, you'll have to bear it yourself which is a loss to the company.
2. Even if such a process is provided, you cannot alter the previous invoices and your EWT amount does not correspond to the invoice you account for. SAP works in an assumption that Tax will be calculated as a % of base price and cannot exceed it.
The only way to mitigate this is to decide whether a Vendor would require this exemption to be declared based on past experience and past amount of transactions in the beginning itself. If it is unlikely, better do not declare the accumulation limit for them. This will save you from incurring loss and reducing the risk for the company. Start deducting right from the beginning.
If you are not sure, instead of giving accumulation, you can declare exemption upto 75000. In this case, SAP cannot check whether the Vendor has crossed the limit or not. You'll have to manually check and pass a Debit note to that extent when he exceeds the limit. Again, this does not evade the risk of loss for the company. Also, you cannot do TDS post processing for this amount (like TDS Remittance challan, TDS Certificate etc).
So, in my opinion, try and decide if the Vendor would require accumulation right in the beginning itself. Even if not able to decide, you can still deduct the tax and issue a TDS certificate, which the Vendor can claim refund based on his transactions with you from the Income Tax in case he does not exceed the limit. This will limit the risk of loss for the company.
Ravi.

Transaction Data Estimates

This may come off as a very generic request, but can anyone point me in the direction of somewhere to research the amount of transactional data created by Enterprises (across any/all industries)?
I am looking for information that helps to breakdown the expontential increase in transaction data that is created versus historical numbers for the amount of data created.
Thank you for any assistance you can provide.

Hi Kutti,
True - You need to select the option in the infopackage - alwyas load even if no master data exists.
Bye
Dinesh

Accrued Sales Tax Amount & Vendor Charged Sales Tax amount

Hi,
I need to Genertate a Report for Sales Tax. Please suggest TABLE & FIELDS names & information of
+Accrued Sales Tax Amount+
& Vendor Charged Sales Tax amount
Thanks in Advance.

Hi Harshita......
Think why you want to change the Tax Amount at transaction level?
Because you want to match the figure with the Hard Copy.
So if you change the Tax Amount at Outgoing Excise Invoice level then how Delivery And its AR Invoice Total will be vary?
By the way If you see the JV of Delivery it is not at all matched with AR Invoice provided Purchase Cost should not be equalt to Sales Cost.
Delivery is only concern with stock not value.....
SO there wont be any problem I guess......
Regards,
Rahul

Sales Tax Amount amendment

Dear all,
Customer wants to change tax amount at the time of sales Invoice creation ,as he is able to do at the time of purchase.
Please provide some solution how user can update tax amount additional duty in case of.
Regards

Hi Harshita......
Think why you want to change the Tax Amount at transaction level?
Because you want to match the figure with the Hard Copy.
So if you change the Tax Amount at Outgoing Excise Invoice level then how Delivery And its AR Invoice Total will be vary?
By the way If you see the JV of Delivery it is not at all matched with AR Invoice provided Purchase Cost should not be equalt to Sales Cost.
Delivery is only concern with stock not value.....
SO there wont be any problem I guess......
Regards,
Rahul

Authorization restriction on amount and document type

Hi,
The business need is to resctrict the authorization of docuemnt posting on the below levels:-
1.) Transaction Type - This can be controlled by document type / transaction code
2.) Amount per transaction type
Example,
Let us say there are two user ids FIUSER1 and FIUSER2.
FIUSER1 should have the authorization of posting cash transactions will 5,000 amount and vendor invoices will 1,00,000 amount.
while
FIUSER2 should have the authorization of posting cash transactions will 25,000 amount and vendor invoices will 10,00,000 amount.
Can we do it with standard SAP without using validations / user exits / exhancements?
Thanks,
Nitish

Use GGB0 to create a validation and in that you can create different sets using GS01 to validate diffrent user ID's.
Like you can set the validation on - BLART , TCODE and WRBTR .
Else you can use the exit functionality in GGB0 and then activate the same in OB28 or GGB4 .
Cheers ,
Dewang

Transactions entity bean

We have a rather large system where we get a lot of transactions. To
tune our system we decided to turn off transaction support for some
beans. (by setting the transaction attribute to NotSupported).
The system did not decrease the amount of transactions run so we
started wondering what was going on.
To test this we first implemented a small test application and then
also tested some examples provided by weblogic. In both cases we came
to the conclusion that when using entity beans transactions are always
run. We tested with wl6.1 and wl6.1sp3
A short example of some code:
Client:
for (int i=0; i<numBeans; i++) {
accounts = findOrCreateAccount("ID: "+i, i * 1000);
//transfer 1000 from account 10 to account 11
try {
accounts[10].withdraw(1000);
accounts[11].deposit(1000);
} catch (ProcessingErrorException e) {
log(" could not xfer cash");
} catch (RemoteException e) {
log(" could not xfer cash");
AccountBean (Entity Bean)
public double deposit(double amount) {
log("Depositing $" + amount + " into '" + accountId + "'");
if (weblogic.transaction.TxHelper.getTransaction() == null) {
log("dep no transaction");
else {
log("dep tx:
"+weblogic.transaction.TxHelper.getTransaction().getXID());
balance += amount;
if(true) {
log("throwing EJB EXCEPTION FOR TESTING");
throw new EJBException();
return balance;
ejb-jar.xml
<container-transaction>
<method>
<ejb-name>beanManaged</ejb-name>
     <method-intf>Remote</method-intf>
     <method-name>deposit</method-name>
</method>
<method>
<ejb-name>beanManaged</ejb-name>
     <method-intf>Remote</method-intf>
     <method-name>withdraw</method-name>
</method>
<trans-attribute>NotSupported</trans-attribute>
</container-transaction>
The first indication that a transaction was running was to check the
log:
deposit transaction: 370:971b99c458e3d95b
Then the transaction was rolled back and and we could see that the
account balance was unchanged which proves that a transaction was
running.
We can't be the first ones to discover this, but I can't find this
documented anywhere else.

If an entity bean is called and no transaction is in effect, the container
will
always start a transaction for its own use. Its not expensive to start a
transaction in WLS. The best architecture is almost always to
begin/commit
transactions before calling entity beans and let the entity beans inherit
the transaction, so that multiple calls to an entity bean are grouped into
a single transaction.
Seth
Daniel Bernholc wrote:
We have a rather large system where we get a lot of transactions. To
tune our system we decided to turn off transaction support for some
beans. (by setting the transaction attribute to NotSupported).
The system did not decrease the amount of transactions run so we
started wondering what was going on.
To test this we first implemented a small test application and then
also tested some examples provided by weblogic. In both cases we came
to the conclusion that when using entity beans transactions are always
run. We tested with wl6.1 and wl6.1sp3
A short example of some code:
Client:
for (int i=0; i<numBeans; i++) {
accounts = findOrCreateAccount("ID: "+i, i * 1000);
//transfer 1000 from account 10 to account 11
try {
accounts[10].withdraw(1000);
accounts[11].deposit(1000);
} catch (ProcessingErrorException e) {
log(" could not xfer cash");
} catch (RemoteException e) {
log(" could not xfer cash");
AccountBean (Entity Bean)
public double deposit(double amount) {
log("Depositing $" + amount + " into '" + accountId + "'");
if (weblogic.transaction.TxHelper.getTransaction() == null) {
log("dep no transaction");
else {
log("dep tx:
"+weblogic.transaction.TxHelper.getTransaction().getXID());
balance += amount;
if(true) {
log("throwing EJB EXCEPTION FOR TESTING");
throw new EJBException();
return balance;
ejb-jar.xml
<container-transaction>
<method>
<ejb-name>beanManaged</ejb-name>
<method-intf>Remote</method-intf>
<method-name>deposit</method-name>
</method>
<method>
<ejb-name>beanManaged</ejb-name>
<method-intf>Remote</method-intf>
<method-name>withdraw</method-name>
</method>
<trans-attribute>NotSupported</trans-attribute>
</container-transaction>
The first indication that a transaction was running was to check the
log:
deposit transaction: 370:971b99c458e3d95b
Then the transaction was rolled back and and we could see that the
account balance was unchanged which proves that a transaction was
running.
We can't be the first ones to discover this, but I can't find this
documented anywhere else.

Amount get Inventorized in J1iex

Hello
System automatically inventorized amount in transaction code J1iex during posting of the cenvat amount. It had been checked that material is neither categorized as N in J1id not any tick had been made in MRP during MIGO
Please provide the reason of such posting so that rectification can be done
Thanks in advance
Regards'
Anil Chawla

Thanks.
Condition type being used are same for all. It is happening for some material codes.
Thanks
Regards
Anil chawla

Generate Transaction Data

Hello xperts,
I'm building a custom demo environment.
I need to have a reasonable amount of transaction data, which I will load from flat files.
Does anybody know how to generate transaction data in a fairly quick way. For example through an Excel macro, Access database, tool, etc.
Any suggestions are highly appreciated!
Thx
JvB
Message was edited by: JvB

JvB,
In my last couple of assignments we created test data in DEV/TEST environment & extracted them using standard business content datasource in BW to check the validity of Datasources.
As far as creating it on flat files is concerned its going to be time consuming process, may be using excel might help.
Just save them as CSV files (to load in BW)so that u can use excel which is more convient to use than notepad.
Hope this helps.
Monica

Amount of transaction

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for