BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE behaving differently in development and quality

Question

My program is behaving correctly in development system -
1. The program is run
2. Changes are made to material in MM02 transaction
3.  In the program, a button is executed where I am calling a BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE, which returns values correctly, as per the material status (be it error or success)
In the Quality system it behaves incorrectly-
1. The program in run
2. Changes are made to material in MM02 transaction
3. In the program when the button is executed the BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE, seems to retain the earlier status. Recent changes to material are not reflected in the return parameter, no matter how many times I try.
4. When I restart the program, the BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE shows up the correct return values of the changes made in step 2.
Steps taken -
1. I have compared the versions of the code in both the systems and they are identical.
2. To be sure I once again transported the changes to the quality system, yet the problem remains.
3. I tried with a different data thinking it to be a problem with the data rather than the code, but the problem remains
Edited by: GhoshA on Mar 8, 2012 8:06 AM

Answer 1

So some entry related to MM02 is present in SM13 ?
In the quality system in SM13 -
Update module ID     Module name (function)     Type     Update return code
1     MCB_STATISTICS_UPD_V2     V2     Processed
2     MCEX_UPDATE_03     Collective run     Initial
3     AC_DOCUMENT_MM_UPDATE     V2     Processed
4     LIEFERUNG_WRITE_DOCUMENT     V2     Processed
5     SLIM_CNT_INCREASE_COUNTER     V2     Processed
6     MCF_STATISTICS_UPD_V2     V2     Processed
Double clicking every entry gave - ' Status: Not yet updated'
Interestingly, in the Quality system, even after continuous refresh, the record does not get  removed. However, the records in the Development system for the same situation, get removed, after four or five times refresh.
In Quality even after I restart the transaction, the records do not get removed from SM13, but again the code works correctly for the newly executed instance.
What is your opinion ?