Best practice to transport KANK parameters?

Hi all,
My point is about Number ranges for CO document.
SAP help indicates (for KANK transaction - number ranges for CO document) that i is preferable not to transport the number ranges parameters from the source environment to the cible. I guess the reason is that it is to guarantee the coherence between the source and the cible.
My situation is the following: my environnements are new, so I am initializing the CO environment. I am starting from scratch! By the way, I think that I could easily transport KANK parameters without any discordance problem, because there are no postings in the cible.
My question is: what do you think of my transport procedure? The point is that I will need to follow the same transport procedure for all the environments in the future.
Cheers
Pascal

I don't agree.
For an initial system build it is probably preferable to transport number ranges so that they are done consistently. You know... we all make mistakes and if you have to manually replicate this for every sytem build (Test, QA, Training, Production, Production Fail, etc.) even the best of us will make a mistake.
I wouldn't transport in a live system for the very reason that the system issues the warning when you save the changes. But for a new build I would do it.
Just my opinion...
-nathan

Similar Messages

Best Practice to transport MDM Workflows trough a 3-tier Landscape

Hello Experts,
I wanted to ask you for some Best practices to transport MDM Workflows from D-to Q/P?
Well besides the Archive/Unarchive method because we want to keep the Data of P in the repository
and do not want to import the whole.
Any ideas? Points are for sure!!
Best regards
Carsten

Hi Carsten,
Currently with the MDM 5.5 version the only transport mechanism that will allow you to export your Workflows from the development server to the Production or Quality is the Archieve/Unarchieve method.
but this methods archives the data as well along with the workflow.There is no such method to exort the workflow alone.
But with the onset of the MDM 7.1 there are new transport mechanism included and hopefully they address this issue.
A work around that i can think of at this moment:
- If you have your development server as your Master rep and the Production server as your slave
- Then you can call the workflow from the D to the P.If you do not have any data presntly in the dev.
- and then Normalize the Productions server to make it an individual master rep with its own data.
I am not sure how well this solution will help but just a suggestion....
Hope It Helped
Thanks & Regards
Simona Pinto

Best practices for transport of setup of archivelink/contentserver

Hi
I'm using the archivelink setup to store all kind of documents/files and to archive outgoing documents and print lists (print and archive).
But I don't know how we should transport the setting.
We need different setup in dev/qa/prd systems because we don't want documents from our development system stored in the same server as the documents from our productive system.
We have 2 setup used in different scenarios :
1) We link the ObjectType/Doc.type to different content repositories in OAC3 (D1 for dev, Q1 for qa and P1 for prd)
2) We point the content repository to different HTTP servers in OAC0/CSADMIN
In both scenarios I see 2 options.
1) open for customizing in qa and prd systems and maintain the different setups directly in each system.
2) We Transport the prd content repositories all the way, but delete the transport with qa content repositories after import to the qa system and finally we don't transport the dev content repositories at all.
Both options are bad practices, but what are Best practices?
Best regards
Thomas Madsen Nielsen

Hi David,
The best mechanism is probably transporting the objects in the same order as creating/changing them. The order would be Application Components, Info Area, Info-objects, Transfer Structure, Transfer Rules, Communication Structure, InfoCube, Update rules, Infopackages and the frontend components.
There are many topics on BW transports in SDN forum. You can search for them.
You can refer to this link for more details on transports in BW System:
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/b5/1d733b73a8f706e10000000a11402f/frameset.htm
Bye
Dinesh

Best Practice: Migrating transports to Prod (system down etc.)

Hi all
This is more of a process and governance question as opposed to a ChaRM question.
We use ChaRM to migrate transports to Production systems. For example, we have a Minor BAU Release (every 2 weeks), a Minor Initiative Release (every 4 weeks) and a Major Release (every 3 months).
We realise that some of the major releases may require SAP to be taken offline. But what is SAP Best practice for ANY release into Production? i.e. for our Minor BAU Release we never shut down any Production systems, never stop batch jobs, never lock users etc.
What does SAP recommend when migrating transports to Prod?
Thanks
Shaun

Have you checked out the "Two Value Releases Per Year" whitepaper for SAP recommendations? Section 6 is applicable.
Lifetime Support by SAP &raquo; Two Value Releases per Year
The "real-world" answer is going to depend on how risk-adverse versus downtime adverse your company is. I think most companies would choose to keep the systems running except when SAP forces an outage or there is a real risk of data corruption (some data conversions and data loads, for example).
Specific to your minor BAU releases, it may be wise to make a process whereby anything that requires a production shutdown, stopped batch jobs, locked users, etc. needs to be in a different release type. But if you don't have the kind of control, your process will need to allow for these things to happen with those releases.
Also, with regards to stopping batch jobs in the real world, you always need to balance the desire to take full advantage of the available systems versus the pain of managing the variations. If your batch schedule is full, how are you going to make sure the critical jobs complete on time when you do need to take the system down? If it isn't full, why do you need that time? Can you make sure only non-critical batch jobs run during those times? Do you have a good method of implementing an alternate batch schedule when need be?

Transport Best Practices - Cumulative Transports

Hi All,
    I am looking for a some sort of authoritative guide from SAP on ECC Transport Best Practices, especially around merging/combining/accumulating multiple transports into fewer ones. We are a very large project, but we haven't figured out the CVSs like ChaRm so we still deal with individual transports.
The reason I am asking this is that we some development leads on our project that insist that ALL transports that leave Development system must be imported into Production. They claim this the SAP best practice. An SAP consulting review of our system also left a vague note that "We are orphaning transports". This could mean that 1. either we are not importing all the stuff that leaves Dev system 2. or we are not keeping track of our code changes across all environments. Proponents of "All transports must get to PRD" are interpreting this as "1".
I have my team cumulate transport for subsequent changes into newer transport and only take the newest Transport to Production. The continuous rolling of old Transport into new one using SE01 "Include Objects" options ensures that all changes part of current development are in a single TR. Fewer transports mean fewer housekeeping across all systems, and less chances of something going out of sequence or missed out. This is for Workbench Transports only. I understand Config transports could get a little tricky with rolling in.
If you can't point me to a link, what is your take on "Send everything to Prod" vs. "Combine changes into fewer Transports"? I can't think of any software packaging methodology that suggests putting everything, including some junk/crap, into production build. I have looked at SAP enhancement packs, SPS, and Notes. I haven't found any evidence of SAP including older buggy code in what it releases to its customers.
Thank you all!

Jānis, Christian,
    I think we are all on the same page. Let me clarify my specific scenario a little bit more.
We are about 15 ABAP developers team, for production support. We don't do huge changes. Our code updates are mostly limited to a handful of objects (average 2 - 5). We often have multiple iterations to same objects. For large scale development objects, this approach may not work very well. Those should really utilize SolMan or other CVS tools.
Here is How I have my team putting together final transport.
step 1. Change is done to object X. Transport #1 created and released after standard checks.
step 2. More change is needed for object X. Transport #2 Started. Transport #1 is brought in using SE01 include objects at the main task. Changed objects are in lower tasks. This way, I can tell what was brought over, and what really changed this time. Releases of the Transport #2 inspects all objects and insures all objects from #1 are included in #2, and that there are no other changes between #1 and #2 to any of the objects. This is very easy check mostly from Version History.
Step 3. More changes needed to object X and Y. Transport #3 started. Transport #2 brought in at main task. Same check from Step 2 is done to ensure no other changes exist.
step 4....6. Step 6 ended at Transport #6. All changes verified in QA system.
Only the Transport #6 needs to be sent to Production since previous Transports 1 to 5 were rolled into #6.
Jānis, the deletions will be covered automatically just like standard SAP. No special manual steps needed.
Christian,
   The transport of copies works in similar way. Only thing different is that the Main/cumulative transport is released at very last, possibly after QA tests have been confirmed.
I had thought about doing Copies vs. cumulative. I preferred to go with having Transport in QA already at the time of approval. I would have hard time explaining to our client why a Transport was released out of Dev After all tests were done and signed off.
However, the Copies have advantage that intermediate versions or parallel changes of same objects are easily recognized upfront vs. us having to check each transport before release.
Jānis, the "copies of Transport" also creates extra versions in version history just like manually adding objects in a transport.
My quick analysis between copies and cumulative only came with one different that 'copies' have a different flag/attribute in Table E070. I am sure the flag means something to SAP, but for versioning history, it makes no differences.
Regardless of if I cumulate or not, based on your experiences, have you come across notion that everything that leaves Dev must get to PRD as SAP Best Practice? What would your reply be if someone insists that is the only way to move code to production?

Best practice of getting request parameters in JSP page

int period_Id = 0;
try
period_Id = Integer.parseInt(request.getParameter("period_id"));
catch(Exception e)
period_Id = 0;
}This is the normal way we use to get parameters from previous page.
But I am not sure if it is thebest practice.
Please respond if anyone knows a better way.
Regards

Using java code in a JSP is a horrible practice. There are far better ways to write JSP's nowadays in the form of custom tags, JSTL and possibly JSF. Combined with servlets this will make your code clean, reusable and maintainable.
However if you insist and using scriptlets, I'd say create your own request bean that wraps around the HttpServletRequest and write methods getParameterInt(), getParameterDouble(), etc. Such a method could look like this:
public int getParameterInt(String name, int default)
String paramstr = request.getParameter(name);
if(paramstr == null || paramstr.length() == 0){
return default;
try{
return Integer.parseInt(paramstr);
} catch(Exception e) {
return default;
}With such a bean you never have to do that exception catching yourself again: you can just pass the parameter name and a default value that will be returned if the parameter does not exist or is not a valid integer.

Best Practices For Portal Content Objects Transport System

Hi All,
I am going to make some documentation on Transport Sytem for Portal content objects in Best Practices.
Please help in out and send me some documents related to SAP Best Practices for transport for Portal Content Objects.
Thanks,
Iqbal Ahmad
Edited by: Iqbal Ahmad on Sep 15, 2008 6:31 PM

Hi Iqbal,
Hope you are doing good
Well, have a look at these links.
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/91/4931eca9ef05449bfe272289d20b37/frameset.htm
This document, gives a detailed description.
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/f570c7ee-0901-0010-269b-f743aefad0db
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Sandeep Tudumu

Creating Billing Unit in CRM V1.2007 Best Practices C05

Hi,
in C05 (Org Model with HR Integration) for Best Practices V1.2007 I have to create a Billing Unit.
That means, I have to create a Corporate Account.
For Creation of the Corporate Account i need a Number Range and a Grouping.
My Question:
Maintaining Number Range and Grouping for Business Partners is described in C03.
In the Solution Builder C03 comes after C05.
So I have first to finish C03 manually via SPRO or at least I have to maintain a Number Range and a Grouping so that I´m able to create the Billing Unit as an Corporate Account and then proceed with C05?
Regards
Andreas

Hi Padma,
We are facing the same issue while installing Baseline Best practices.
"Transport numbers not fullfill the requirement"
We are trying to activate full solution.
I have already created a new work bench and customize request ,but stills its gvg "Transport numbers not fullfill the requirement".
Iam not able to find a solution for this on service market place.
Thanks & Regards,

Best Practice for ASA Route Monitoring Options?

We have one pair Cisco ASA 5505 located in different location and there are two point to point links between those two locations, one for primary link (static route w/ low metric) and the other for backup (static route w/ high metric). The tracked options is enabled for monitoring the state of the primary route. the detail parameters regarding options as below,
Frequency: 30 seconds               Data Size: 28 bytes
Threshold: 3000 milliseconds     Tos: 0
Time out: 3000 milliseconds          Number of Packets: 8
------ show run------
sla monitor 1
type echo protocol ipIcmpEcho 10.200.200.2 interface Intersite_Traffic
num-packets 8
timeout 3000
threshold 3000
frequency 30
sla monitor schedule 1 life forever start-time now
------ show run------
I'm not sure if the setting is so sensitive that the secondary static route begins to work right away, even when some small link flappings occur.
What is the best practice to set those parameters up in the production environment. How can we specify the reasonanble monitoring options to fit our needs.
Thank you for any idea.

Hello,
Of course too sensitive might cause failover to happen when some packets get lost, but remember the whole purpose of this is to provide as less downtime to your network as possible,
Now if you tune these parameters what happen is that failover will be triggered on a different time basis.
This is taken from a cisco document ( If you tune the sla process as this states, 3 packets will be sent each 10 seconds, so 3 of them need to fail to SLA to happen) This CISCO configuration example looks good but there are network engineers that would rather to use a lower time-line than that.
sla monitor 123
type echo protocol ipIcmpEcho 10.0.0.1 interface outside
num-packets 3
frequency 10
Regards,
Remember to rate all of the helpful posts ( If you need assistance knowing how to rate a post just let me know )

Best Practice/Standard for Securing and Attaching Files in a Web Service

Thanks in advance.
Being new to Web Services as well as most of my team. I would like to know what is the best practice for transporting files via a Web Service. I know of several methods and one that seems to be the standard, but you can't really tell in this ever changing world of Web Services. Below are the options that I have found.
1. MIME encoded the file and embed in the payload of the SOAP message
2. SwA (SOAP with Attachments) which applies MIME attachments to SOAP. I think this is similiar to the way emails are handled.
3. DIME (Direct Internet Message Encapsulation) similiar to MIME encoding but is more efficient
4. MTOM (Message Transmission Optimization Mechanism) I really not understand this method, but it seems that this is the NEW standard. I just don't understand why.
5. Utilize HTTPS and download the file from an accessible file server w/ a login id and password.
Is there someone out there that understands this problem and can assist me in understanding the pros and cons of these methods? Or maybe there is a method that I'm overlooking altogether.
Thanks

JWSDP supports securing of attachments [1]and will soon support securing MTOM attachments too. [1]http://java.sun.com/webservices/docs/2.0/xws-security/ReleaseNotes.html

Best practices of BO/BW SSO SAP Authentication transports

Hi Friends,
We are going to integrate BW system with BO (SAP authentication). All the queries are built through BICS connections. And we have various reporting tools to implement SSO SAP authentication (Webi,Crystal,Dashboard.Design studio…etc)
As per the process there are certain activities which has to be performed at BW level
e.g -- BW Roles creation (PFCG---Crystal role enablement) and assigning to BO users
Once it is created in BW , we have to do integration at BO level( in CMC application) by selecting authentication and roles import followed by ……Groups..Users…folder and access level...
My question here is
Transports of BW objects for BO SSO (SAP) authentication (such as roles created for Users, Keystore certificate, uploads). Will these objects be transported by BW team or they will be separately downloading or uploading the certificate in different systems (like QAS ...PROD….)
And at BO level, once I integrate BO SSO, Do I need to do manual integration in QAS and Production system as well or it can be transported with promotion management of BO tool
Will these SSO(SAP) authentication can be applied to all tools in BI Launchpad such as (Design studio,Webi,Web application,Crystal….etc) as all users are required to have SSO to all BO tool
Regarding LUMIRA tool , Can we do SSO authentication
Please share your thoughts and experience.
I t would be great if I get BO administration best practices document for BW BO SSO and Users and Group management in CMC for implementing
Thanks in advance

Hi ,
Please find my answers below:
1. The roles will be created in BW and should automatically appear in BO CMC Authentication SAP roles, if there is a connectivity setup between BO and BW irrespective of the SSO.The roles are transported by the BW security team.
2. Every environement will have a unique connection to the corresponding SAP BW environment.For example SAP BW DEV will be mapped to BO DEV, SAP BW PROD will be mapped to BO PROD.So these settings cannot be migrated through Promotion Management.
3.This authentication can be applied to all tools , the SSO does not depend on the tool ,it depends on the integration between two systems which in this case are BO and SAP BW
As mentioned earlier, after integration all tools can have SSO
You can refer to a lot of help documents on this site which will help you to setup the integration between SAP BW AND SAP BO.
Kind Regards,
Priyanka

Best Practice transport procedure for SRM-MDM Catalogue repositories change

Hi,
I have a question regarding SRM-MDM Catalogue repository change transports.
We currently have two QA servers and to Production servers (main and fail-over).
We are investigating the need of a Development server.
Changes are being made to the repositories on the system, and I see the need of a dev server.
What is best practice for SRM-MDM Catalogue?
With only QA and Prod environments I guess Repository schema transport is the best option, since there has not been created a Refference file (which is needed for change file transport).
Any other options?
We are running MDM as well, with dev, QA and prod environments. Here we use CTS+ for transports.
Is it best practice to use CTS+ also for SRM-MDM Catalogue transports?
KR,
Thomas

Hi Thomas.
What is best practice for SRM-MDM Catalogue?
SAP recommends to have the landscape model like DEV-QA-PROD.
So in case of catalog as well if we follow the same technique it will help you to have a successful implementation
Any other options?
As a part of proceeding with the CTS+ you need to create a reference file
Refer the Link: [CTS+|http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/d0dd1ae0-36e5-2b10-f8b4-e6365e643c0b?quicklink=index&overridelayout=true] for more details
Is it best practice to use CTS+ also for SRM-MDM Catalogue transports?
It is upto the requirement. if you feel there are many changes in catalog xml schema in various phases in an automatic manner then you can go ahead with CTS+ or you can perform the existing method of exporting and importing the schema to the repository.
Hope it helps.
Best Regards
Bala
Edited by: chandar_sap on Sep 28, 2011 12:17 PM

How to set global parameters? (Best Practice?)

Dear all,
I've experience with Infor Performance Management tools, Qlikview and also SAP Business Objects Reporting. As for last week i'm new to Microsoft Reporting Services. In our current environemnt we're setting up a Report Structure on top of an Analysis Service
Cube.
Currently I'm creating various reports (which works fine) on the mentioned Analysis Service Cube.
My current question is, if there is a best practice to create reports with global variables? We'll have a package of ~20 reports which all relate to the same data source. My approach is that i'll define the reports, but the global parameters like "Current
year", "Last year" etc. should be defined on a global page. That's the way I would have done it in the other BI tools.
How is this done best in MS Reporting Services? Should i add an additional flat SQL server source and put the values in some ref tables? Or script the global parameter?

Hi Praveen G,
this blog was one of the sources I already found.
I was searching for the "official" way to set the default-workbook - without manipulating the tables programmaticaly (and possibly inconsistant).
Best regards,
Marco

Portal System Transport (Best Practice)

Hello,
We have DEV, QA and PRD landscape. We have created systems that connect to backend ECC systems. Since the DEV and QA ECC system has one application server, we have created a portal system of type singe application server in the DEV Portal that points to DEV ECC system. Subsequently we have transported this portal system to QA portal and make it point to QA ECC.
Now the Prd ECC systems is of type load balancing with multiple servers. The portal system that connects to Prd ECC system should also be of type Load Balancing. Now we cannot transport the QA portal system that connects to QA ECC system to prd since its of type Single Application Server.
What will be the best strategy to create the portal system in prd portal that points to PRD ECC.
1. Create the portal system freshly in Prd system of type Load Ballancing. Does it adhere to the best practise approach that suggest Not to Create anyting in prd system directly.
OR
2, Is there any other way that should I follow to make sure that Best Practices for Portal Dvelepment is followed.
Regards
Deb

I don't find it useful to transport system objects so I make them manually.

Best practice to NOT transport reports?

Hi,
I was once told that it was best practice NOT to transport reports, templates, process chains and packages. (BW 3.5). These objects changed so often that you would spend to much time transporting. Now I have heard from others that it is usual to transport these things. What is your opinion on this?
Regards Silje

Hi,
Test queries for the user and the process chains which are needed to be created and not affecting any data loads and need not be tested in test system like deleting the PSA....these kind of objects are directly created in production and need not be transported again.
But even in the case of process chains changes are not supposed to be done directly in production.
But SOX compliance and SAP says that every object should be first changed into development and transported till production...and as you said its usual to do changes to these objects and transport them to production.
Thanks
Ajeet

Best practice to transport KANK parameters?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for