Challenge Task !!!!!

In BDC.........while Recordingthe screen resolution for line items differs from system to system. .......how to make the coding fit for all the resolutions in case of BATCH INPUT METHOD ?
....As far as i know while using CALL TRANSACTION ...we can declare a structure with type CTUPARAMS....and set the DEFAULT SIZE ....By doing so...the screen resolution becomes 10.no matter where u r executing the program.
And so we can write as....
CALL TRANSACTION 'VK11' OPTIONS FROM S_CTUPARAMS.
But how to do with Batch I/p...... ..As we use FM's...BDC_OPEN_GROUP, BDC_INSERT, BDC_CLOSE_GROUP.
Pls...help me out !!!!!!

Hi John..
In ABAP Editor using PATTERN call the FM BDC_INSERT
it will be like this:
CALL FUNCTION 'BDC_INSERT'
EXPORTING
TCODE                  = FILLER4
POST_LOCAL             = NOVBLOCAL
PRINTING               = NOPRINT
SIMUBATCH              = ' '
<b>*   CTUPARAMS              = ' '</b>
TABLES
    DYNPROTAB              =
EXCEPTIONS
INTERNAL_ERROR         = 1
NOT_OPEN               = 2
QUEUE_ERROR            = 3
TCODE_INVALID          = 4
PRINTING_INVALID       = 5
POSTING_INVALID        = 6
OTHERS                 = 7
IF SY-SUBRC <> 0.
MESSAGE ID SY-MSGID TYPE SY-MSGTY NUMBER SY-MSGNO
        WITH SY-MSGV1 SY-MSGV2 SY-MSGV3 SY-MSGV4.
ENDIF.
Here you can find the parameter CTUPARAMS.. fill a Work area and pass it...
<b>reward points if helpful</b>

Similar Messages

Challenging Task - Two Domains - Two Office 365 Service

Hi All,
We have a challenging task ahead of us at my small company and we are trying to figure out the best way to do things.
A quick summary of the situatoin
We are ABC.COM and we sit in XYZ.COM's building with their own infrastructure. We log into their domain, etc.
We currently use abc.com's Office 365 Services with just a different smtp address set per account.
5 out of the 20 people who work for ABC.COM use XYZ.COM as their primary SMTP address. (this is required for business purposes since it is our parent company and they leverage their powerful name).
We are isolating ABC.COM and building a whole new virtual/cloud infrastructure and signing up for their own Office 365 Service.
Our Challenge:
5 of the 20 still need to send and receive as XYZ.COM but we want them to log into our newly created Domain / Virtual Environment and also still access XYZ.COM's Intranet Site (for benefits, forms, since its our parent company).
How would we go about doing this cleanly?
We have some general ideas but we've been thinking of situations that may cause problems like Account Lockouts for those 5 individuals or passwords expiring on XYZ.COM (there is no way we can set ourselves to never expire).
I really hope this is clear and we're just looking to do this correctly.
Now, we have different opinions on how this should be done but I'm curious if anyone has come across this before and what they have done successfully. We can't afford to do this and then find major issues down the line.
Thanks,
Patrick

just give them OWA access or create a trust between two org.,
Where Technology Meets Talent

A real challenged task in BW - Only experts can solve it

Hi BW experts,
I get a new task, to create a cube for analyzing our products at the customers.
The customers send us some files that contain some products details.
For examples, let's say thta the products are computers and the files are:
1. Operation system
customer ID, product ID, OS name, OS version
2. Firewall properties
customer ID, product ID, FW property name, FW property value
3. Browser details
customer ID, product ID, browser name, browser version
Each customer ID and product ID may have more than one record. In other words they not the key of the table.
The questions that we would like to ask, are:
1. How many many customers have OS name = Linux.
2. Which customer have product ID = 111, and fw_property_name = zzz and browser name = Mozilla.
3. How many customers have OS_name = windows AND
browser_name = mozilla.
Can you please assist of it?
Best regards,
Mohamad.

Hi Philipp,
Thank you for the replying.
Please look at the example below;
1. Operation system
customer ID, product ID, OS name, OS version
111 , comp01 , Window , XP
2. Firewall properties
customer ID, product ID, FW property name, FW property value
111 , comp01 , FW_Protection_extent , Full
111 , comp01, Is_AntiSpy_switched_on, true
3. Browser details
customer ID, product ID, browser name, browser version
111 , comp01 , Internet Explorer , 7.0
111 , comp01 , Mozilla , 2.0
As your suggestion, the fact table should be like this:
customer ID, product ID, OS name, OS version, FW property name, FW property value, browser name, browser version , KeyFigure(Fix value = 1)
Therefore, we need to perform a JOIN between all the files above, and then load them to the cube. What we will get is;
111,comp01,Window,XP,FW_Protection_extent,Full,Internet Explorer , 7.0 , 1
111,comp01,Window,XP,FW_Protection_extent,Full,Mozilla , 2.0 , 1
111,comp01,Window,XP,Is_AntiSpy_switched_on, true,Internet Explorer , 7.0 , 1
111,comp01,Window,XP,Is_AntiSpy_switched_on, true,Mozilla , 2.0 , 1
This will solve our issue, but the problem of this solution that if each file contains 1000 records, then the JOIN will give 100010001000 records. Therefore, it's not legitimate solution.
Best regards,
Mohamad

Help me- Challenging Task......

We Have a requirement like this.
Consider P2P Cycle.
In one Operating unit Purchasing Operations.
Other Operating Unit Payables Operations.(Head Quarters)
We dont have VPN connection
we have 2 servers,Purchasing server(Lets say server1) and other will be in HQ (Lets say Server2)
Since we dont have VPN conncetion,we need to interface these two servers.
How to do it..?
I need to generate flat files from server1 , will be feeded to server2.
for eg:i will create po in server1,Receipt in server1,generate invoice in server1.
these three things should reflect in server2.
so payments can be made in server2.
How to accomplish this...????

Depends on server visibility and/or security rules implemented. Once you do have the flat files they can be transferred in the way you decide, be it a tape, a ftp transfer... Or if possible and required also a message based communication such as interconnect, or perhaps web services. It depends on business requirements and available resources.

Difficult tasks

What will be the most difficult and challenging task for a dba?

Fahd Mirza wrote:
If you know things, you know things,That does not mean it is not difficult and challenging. Being too sure about its own knowledge (e.g. not checking the doc, not testing) can be disastrous.
and if you don't know things, you don't know.That does not mean you're not able to do it.
Difficult task would be about which DBA doesn't know...Do not know something is not a shame, do not know how to find an answer is a pity.
Nicolas.

BPS- PS Retraction Problems

Hi,
Am using standard FMs UPR_COST_PLAN_INIT and UPR_COST_PLAN_EXEC to retract Primary Cost plan data back to Project Systems.
I have set up a sender structure called UPB_SND_COPS, pointing to receiver structure UPB_RET_COPS. I have two lines in the dictionary structure section: /1SEM/_YS_KYFS_005ZARMPP03 and /1SEM/_YS_CHAS_005ZARMPP03 which relate to my planning area.
QUESTION 1 - do I need to put anything in the offset, field length, field value fields?
I have set up the transfer rules in transaction UPB_RULE. This is where I have the problem. I set up the transfers and ran the retraction and nothing was posted to R/3. When debugging I saw that all of the fields I had set up rules for were blank when sent to R/3.
If I go back and, instead of transfering from the sender to receiver structure, I hard code a value for all the fields in UPB_RULE, then it creates records in R/3.
Has anyone encountered this problem?
Does anyone have any decent documentation on this retractor?
Thanks,
Tristan

Hi ,
I need to retract data from BW-BPS 7.1 to SRM.I am new to BW
(3 months experience)
Can anyone send me documentation , links or steps by steps guide to explain how
to do the link please?
If there are no standard retractors, what is the solution?
This a challenging task for me and I really need to do it at work (there will be
an evaluation at the end of this work).
Thanks in advance for your help.
I'll surely assign points if one can help me.
My mail is [email protected]
Nevil

Displaying the result of the TOP N query

Hi all,
we are facing a challenging task were we are going to build a query that gives the answer on the question:
How many different materials (of the top sold) represent 80% of the total sales in quantity?
The result should of the query should be very short:
                                                                                2002           2003             2004
Nr of materials
reps 80%          432            453               499
The query is build on a CO-PA based cube, where each line corresponds to a billing item with material and quantity.
By using a Top 80% condition on the quantity sold keyfigure we get out the top 80% materials sold:
Year     Material     QTYSold        QTYSold-Ranked
2002     Mtr0323      10000             1
         Mtr0262      9000              2
         Mtr0243      8700              3
         Mtr0763      600               423
         Result       932000            423
2003     Mtr0123      9700             1
         Mtr0332      9100              2
         Mtr0243      8700              3
        Mtr0763      543               453
       Result       912000            453
We would like to supress the materials and only show the result row (or the raked position of the last material).
The problem is that the 'Calculate Single Value As' properties of a formula (or keyfigure) only applies on Displayed Data values. All tests we have done so far with 'supression of zeros' & 'always hide' has messed up or counting / ranking functions.
Is there any function in within formulas that have same functionality like Count,Rank etc?
Is there any other way to supress materials and only show results?
Any suggestions are welcome!

Irina,
Should be achievable using exception aggregation and pre-query.
Create a query that gives the list of material that account for 80% of the sales using condition on the sales column.
In the second query, using exception aggregation, count the number of materials that make up this set for the year. Create a new calculated key figure with the formula as qual to sales key figure. In the properties window, press the enhance button and select count of all values in the first drop down and material in the second drop down. Filter the query on material with a characteristic variable with processing as replacement path. In the variable point it to the first query. Drilldown for this will be year.
This will give you number of materials for one year. If you want comparitive for three years, then three pre-queries and three variables with the calculated key figure restricted to a variable pointing to one years query.
You can use pre-calculated value sets to improve the run for the result query.
Cheers
Aneesh

Re: Whence should come the frameworks?

At 03:44 PM 6/20/98 +0200, Daniel Nguyen wrote (on the polymorphic
polymorphism thread:
Is it a battle between Forte and Sage ?One hopes not, but this reminds me of an interesting question that I would
like to throw out for comment. With any product like Forte, any given
release can only cover so much. Some of what it does not include is core
infrastructure and for that one has simply to work around or wait. But,
there is also a lot which it does not cover which is within the scope of
others to provide. This is particularly apparent in the case of Express
and Conductor where one can clearly extend that which comes from Forte or,
to be more extreme, one can offer an alternative, especially in the case of
Express.
These extensions and alternatives are really a necessary part of getting
work done, but for those with a mind to it, they also present a business
opportunity, either for direct sale to other Forte shops or as a part of
the value-add in a consulting agreement. But, as one moves on to
subsequent releases, there is a natural tension which arises because Forte
is likely to incorporate some of these same extensions into the product.
E.g., various frameworks have provided security components, but R4 will
have its own security component. Forte is also likely to provide
extensions to Express which are not already in a competing framework and
users of that framework will then not benefit automatically by that
extension unless the framework provider works to include the extension as
well.
My impression, correct or not, is that most framework providers are
offering their products as alternatives to Express and, as such, are
essentially competing with future versions of Express. I.e., in the
current release, one can argue that the competing framework is a better
foundation, but if future versions of Express make substantial strides, as
seems to be the expectation, then the providers of that framework have the
difficult task of making equal or greater strides in order for it to
continue to be the case that their offering is still arguably better.
At least one company, DS Data, has taken the alternate position of layering
their products on Express and Conductor. This would seem to put their
users in a somewhat better growth position since future extensions to
Express should be fairly easily incorporated, either by replacing the
previously external component or simply by being added to what is
available. One might argue that this graceful growth potential has been
achieved at the compromise of having to accept the Express and Conductor
foundations as given, but the importance of this is something we each will
have to judge for ourselves. But, even DS Data has the risk that Express
and/or will advance so rapidly as to take over all of the added features
and functionality now provided by their extensions. Their customers should
be OK since this will simply that the extensions are subsumed into the
core, but it does mean that they either lose a product in the future or
have the challenging task of continuing to stay meaningfully ahead.
It seems clear that the more that comes from Forte itself, the more the
Forte community as a whole benefits so I would hope that no one would
advocate that Forte curtail its framework development in order to leave
that market open for the partners. But, if Forte does proceed agressively
on framework development, then, to some extent, it is competing with
partners that provide frameworks. Moreover, as partners do create core
functionality like frameworks, they are creating things which would benefit
the Forte community as a whole, but they cannot expect the whole community
to purchase their framework. I.e., Company X may have some piece of their
framework which is particularly useful, but Company Y has something else
and neither are integrated with Express which one may have chosen if for no
other reason than to stay in optimal tune with what Forte is doing. As
things stand, unless these pieces can be componentialized and the companies
involved are willing to offer them as such as separate products, the only
way the Express user has of getting this functionality is to develop it
themselves or wait for Forte to add it to Express.
What I would like to ask, then, is what people think of what it is that
Forte could do to make this overall structure work better? Not that I see
it as working badly, especially compared to some other environments that I
have seen, but just that there are some real problems without obvious easy
answers.
=========================================================================
Thomas Mercer-Hursh, Ph.D email: [email protected]
Computing Integrity, Inc. sales: 510-233-9329
550 Casey Drive - Cypress Point support: 510-233-9327
Point Richmond, CA 94801-3751 fax: 510-233-6950
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/>

Thomas,
I think you have brought up a really good question and one that deserves
some attention by all:
customers, partners and Forte. The advent of third-party tools for the
Forte marketplace is an interesting prospect. If I take my companies
product (SCAFFOLDS), the original impetus for building such a thing, was not
to offer an alternative to Forte Express, but to offer an alternative to
building applications with raw Forte. And as such, we have not targeted,
feature compared or analyzed Forte Express to help build or sell any part of
our product.
I think the reason for this is that many of us in the framework business do
not see ourselves as having a competing product to Forte Express. The
reason for this is that we have taken on applications with our products that
Forte themselves would not pitch Express at. The architectural descriptions
in SCAFFOLDS have been used to do everything from simple to very complex GUI
development to Database persistence or communications to satellites.
Because of this, there is some overlap of functionality, but certainly we
see Forte Express being used for a much more limited class of application.
I would question the assertion that it is good for Forte to build more. I
think Forte, like any company, has a limited amount of engineering muscle.
With this muscle they should be concentrating on their core products that
make the company profitable. If I look at their product line-up, clearly
the Forte Development Tool is the make or break product. They should rely
more on the marketplace to provide solutions for things that are outside of
their core products. I sort of take the opposite tact. It seems clear that
the more a third party marketplace finds outlets for their solutions the
more diverse solutions we are likely find in that marketplace. As an
example, if you look at the Visual Basic marketplace, clearly it is big with
many, many solutions because Microsoft defined some specs for add in
components and let the marketplace provide solutions.
I think Forte could spend more time opening up their tool for additions by
third-party vendors. For example, things like object introspection, an open
repository and dynamically adding widget types would do wonders for the
number and kinds of solutions that would exist in the Forte marketplace
today if this was done a version or two ago. Instead, I think Forte spent
much of their engineering muscle on other kinds of products, like Forte
Express. Whether this strategy will pay of for them remains to be seen, but
certainly if they enter the Java world, they will have to change their
current strategy with regard to support to third-party solutions. The Java
marketplace is very diverse today and Forte will have to allow more
third-party integration to be taken seriously in that market.
Mark Perreira
Sage IT Partners.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[<a href="mailto:[email protected]">mailto:[email protected]]On</a> Behalf Of Thomas Mercer-Hursh,
Ph.D.
Sent: Saturday, June 20, 1998 11:19 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Whence should come the frameworks?
At 03:44 PM 6/20/98 +0200, Daniel Nguyen wrote (on the polymorphic
polymorphism thread:
Is it a battle between Forte and Sage ?One hopes not, but this reminds me of an interesting question that I would
like to throw out for comment. With any product like Forte, any given
release can only cover so much. Some of what it does not include is core
infrastructure and for that one has simply to work around or wait. But,
there is also a lot which it does not cover which is within the scope of
others to provide. This is particularly apparent in the case of Express
and Conductor where one can clearly extend that which comes from Forte or,
to be more extreme, one can offer an alternative, especially in
the case of
Express.
These extensions and alternatives are really a necessary part of getting
work done, but for those with a mind to it, they also present a business
opportunity, either for direct sale to other Forte shops or as a part of
the value-add in a consulting agreement. But, as one moves on to
subsequent releases, there is a natural tension which arises because Forte
is likely to incorporate some of these same extensions into the product.
E.g., various frameworks have provided security components, but R4 will
have its own security component. Forte is also likely to provide
extensions to Express which are not already in a competing framework and
users of that framework will then not benefit automatically by that
extension unless the framework provider works to include the extension as
well.
My impression, correct or not, is that most framework providers are
offering their products as alternatives to Express and, as such, are
essentially competing with future versions of Express. I.e., in the
current release, one can argue that the competing framework is a better
foundation, but if future versions of Express make substantial strides, as
seems to be the expectation, then the providers of that framework have the
difficult task of making equal or greater strides in order for it to
continue to be the case that their offering is still arguably better.
At least one company, DS Data, has taken the alternate position
of layering
their products on Express and Conductor. This would seem to put their
users in a somewhat better growth position since future extensions to
Express should be fairly easily incorporated, either by replacing the
previously external component or simply by being added to what is
available. One might argue that this graceful growth potential has been
achieved at the compromise of having to accept the Express and Conductor
foundations as given, but the importance of this is something we each will
have to judge for ourselves. But, even DS Data has the risk that Express
and/or will advance so rapidly as to take over all of the added features
and functionality now provided by their extensions. Their
customers should
be OK since this will simply that the extensions are subsumed into the
core, but it does mean that they either lose a product in the future or
have the challenging task of continuing to stay meaningfully ahead.
It seems clear that the more that comes from Forte itself, the more the
Forte community as a whole benefits so I would hope that no one would
advocate that Forte curtail its framework development in order to leave
that market open for the partners. But, if Forte does proceed agressively
on framework development, then, to some extent, it is competing with
partners that provide frameworks. Moreover, as partners do create core
functionality like frameworks, they are creating things which
would benefit
the Forte community as a whole, but they cannot expect the whole community
to purchase their framework. I.e., Company X may have some piece of their
framework which is particularly useful, but Company Y has something else
and neither are integrated with Express which one may have chosen
if for no
other reason than to stay in optimal tune with what Forte is doing. As
things stand, unless these pieces can be componentialized and the
companies
involved are willing to offer them as such as separate products, the only
way the Express user has of getting this functionality is to develop it
themselves or wait for Forte to add it to Express.
What I would like to ask, then, is what people think of what it is that
Forte could do to make this overall structure work better? Not that I see
it as working badly, especially compared to some other environments that I
have seen, but just that there are some real problems without obvious easy
answers.
=========================================================================
Thomas Mercer-Hursh, Ph.D email: [email protected]
Computing Integrity, Inc. sales: 510-233-9329
550 Casey Drive - Cypress Point support: 510-233-9327
Point Richmond, CA 94801-3751 fax: 510-233-6950
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>
>
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>

Conversion of GR/IR Account

Hi All,
Well, we are having a challenging task to perform. Currently, our GR/IR Account is opened as non Open Item Managed. We are now going to convert it to OIM account.
There are few suggestions of converting the account through a provided program of which SAP does not provide support and does not recommend as well.
What we can do is to create a new GR/IR Account. But all trails of current POs would not be available then. What we know is only 1 GR/IR account can be used at once, so new POs would be created in this new account but what will happen to the old ones?
Any suggestion?
BR

Thanks Santosh and Suwani for your suggestions.
The issue is there are around 150-200 invoices of which GR is posted while IR remains. We can't clear them all as PO use to create 20-25 per day therefore can have a single date of finding this account BALANCED.
What we have devised is
0. Create new GR IR Account
1. For all POs of which GR is posted but IR is not posted, debit GRIR in old account and credit with same amount in new GRIR account.
2. Balance will now be ZERO, of old GRIR account
3. Block old GR/IR account for posting
4. Configure new GRIR account in OBYC
5. Do MIRO (post IR)
6. Manually clear G/L through F-03
What do you people recommend of the aforementioned plan?
Thanks again
BR

Gui_download Function module is not working in Background Scheduling

Hi Experts,
Function modules like GUI_DOWNLOAD are not working in background scheduled jobs, It is raising an exception. Though it is working fine in foreground execution.
Please provide me solution for this challenging task.
you could be rated well for this question.
Thanks,
Rama Krishna.

Hello,
work with open dataset and close dataset...
just loop over itab and transfer itab field for field into a string field separated by ;
Here is an extract of coding:
OPEN DATASET p_dath FOR OUTPUT IN TEXT MODE ENCODING DEFAULT.
LOOP AT itab_pos.
    CLEAR satz.
    MOVE itab_pos-vbeln TO satz-vbeln.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill1.
    MOVE itab_pos-kunnr TO satz-kunnr.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill2.
    MOVE itab_pos-ktgrd TO satz-ktgrd.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill3.
    MOVE itab_pos-fkdat TO satz-fkdat.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill4.
    MOVE itab_pos-budat TO satz-budat.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill5.
    MOVE itab_pos-cpudt TO satz-cpudt.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill6.
    MOVE itab_pos-fkimg TO satz-fkimg.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill7.
    MOVE itab_pos-netwr TO satz-netwr.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill8.
    MOVE itab_pos-vrkme TO satz-vrkme.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill9.
    MOVE itab_pos-ktgrm TO satz-ktgrm.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill10.
    MOVE itab_pos-matnr TO satz-matnr.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill11.
    MOVE itab_pos-mattxt TO satz-mattxt.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill12.
    MOVE itab_pos-gewei TO satz-gewei.
    MOVE ';' TO satz-fill13.
    MOVE itab_pos-brgew TO satz-brgew.
    TRANSFER satz TO p_dath.
ENDLOOP.
CLOSE DATASET p_dath.
It is not so comfortable as it is with GUI_DOWNLOAD but it works in background!

MS office report

Hi, I am trying to generate a report using the MS office express vi and after follow the instructions in the manuals and check the examples I cant fill a table predefined in my own template!! and I get an error
Error -41110 occurred at NI_ReportGenerationToolkit.lvlib:ex_RGT_Append Anything To Report.vi -> NI_ReportGenerationToolkit.lvlib:subMS Office Report Block.vi -> test_report.vi:MS Office Report.vi-> test_report.vi
while processing the module_ID input.
I am using labview 2011. attached is a vi that I wrote to study only the report generation.
I appreciate any suggestion.
Attachments:
test report.vi ‏22 KB
SOP_103_template.dot ‏32 KB
base_info_Report.vi ‏17 KB

Well, you have certainly picked a fairly challenging task for LabVIEW to undertake! I've thought about how I would do this (or even if I would do this), and have some observations.
A Word Template does not necessarily make life easier if you are "driving" Word from LabVIEW. It is designed for human interaction, with the (human) ability to tab around and ensure that the cursor is in the correct field for inserting an element.
In particular, your Parts List does not "tab nicely". In particular, it will expect exactly 1 entry in the UNL Batch No., and precisely 4 Parts entries (as you tab around, notice you enter the Batch No. field four times).
If I were doing this, I would generate the entire Report "on the fly", that is, I'd start with a blank Report, generate the heading ("Manufacturing of modules ..."), generate a Report Header Table (Date, Start, Finish, Operator, etc.), generate a Parts List table, and generate a Comments section.
I would certainly "encapsulate" the messy code for each of these steps in its own sub-VI. Thus my Report would look something like this:
Each of the sub-VIs generate part of the Report. Header generates the static text at the top. Report Info generates the Date, Time, Operator, etc. part of the report, Parts List generates the Parts List table, and Comments generates the Comments at the end.
The Report "data" is encapsulated in four variables:
Report Info is a cluster with entries Date, Start Time, Finish Time, Operator, etc.
Parts List is an array of clusters (UNL Batch, BBM ID, and HDI S/N).
Comments is a cluster with entries Orientation, Glueing, etc.
Report Path is the path and name of the output Word document.
Report Info can be formatted as a table of two columns. Each entry has a fixed string (for example, "Date:") and a variable (the value in Report Info.Date, the cluster element). You can format the table with top and bottom borders if you want that look.
Parts List is fairly complicated. It has some "pure text" (the string "List id of parts ...") and a Table. The Table is fairly straight-forward, with a fixed Header and a style for borders and lines. To get the UNL Batch formatting as a single cell, you can try to merge cells (based on where the UNL Batch values remain constant).
Comments can just be treated as ordinary text, with "header strings" (such as "Orientation:") written before the value in the corresponding Comment cluster element (e.g. Orientation) is written.
I can say, with some confidence, that the Snippet above will, in fact, produce a Report that follows your Template, once you handle the "details" of coding those four sub-VIs. Take a look at the Word-specific sub-Palette in the Report Generation Palette, and in the Word Tables sub-sub-Palette.
Bob Schor

Update "Delivery Completed" Indicator in PO Item via EDI

Hello
We have another challenging task regarding purchase order confirmations that we would like to tackle (SAP Release is ERP 6.0).
The 2 partner in our scenario are distribution companies (= DC) which order goods and production companies (= PC) which deliver the goods:
(1) DC sends purchase oder via EDI (ORDERS IDoc)
    -> creates sales order in ERP of PC
(2) PC splits sales order into multiple deliveries.
   Each delivery is sent as outbound DESADV
   -> creates inbound delivery in ERP of DC.
(3) At some point the PC has completed the sales order
   yet it is possible that less was delivered than was ordered
      (i.e. we can have under-deliveries).
Now the question is:
How can the PC transmit the final information "SalesOrder completed" implying that the "Delivery Completed" indicator in the PO items should be updated (= 'X')?
My assumption is that we need to look at the sales order (ERP of PC) because this is the document which "collects" the information from all the split deliveries.
Any help related to understanding how the (standard) business process would look like and how to translate this into a technical solution (EDI / IDoc) is more than welcome.
Regards
Uwe

Hello Uwe,
As you mentioned, I tried to check with the Workflow solution by tracking the events through Business Object BUS2032 (Order) or LIKP (Outbound Delivery) but failed to get successful results.
Problem with BUS2032, event CHANGED is that it doesn't get triggered when the Header/Item level status changed during delivery Processing.
While using BO- LIKP (Outbound Delivery Processing), Events - Changed,Created, I am successful in triggering the event, but the problem with BO-LIKP is that, it does not have the item level details in the ATTRIBUTES list. To get the balance quantity available for order line item (mentioned in my earlier reply)Item details are necessary to findout the Reference Sales Order & Line item. With this, the Option of Triggering of Workflow using LIKP didn't give the required result.

To retrieve the PRT document (a PDF file) and insert the doc in PM order

Hello guys,
I have a challenging task in from printing as follows,
By using TC: IW3D we get print preview of PM Order Set (PM Print Program: YIPRJT01), currently the PRT document number prints in the PM Order. Now we have to insert the PRT documents (a PDF file) into the PM Order set rather than printing the PRT document number ( By using TC: IW33 by going OPERTIONAL TAB we will get the PRT document(a PDF file))
The requirement is to retrieve the PRT document (a PDF file) and insert the document in PM order set with out navigating separately by using the TC: IW33.
If you run the script in the print preview we can able to see PM the order set along with the PRT document (a PDF file).
Thanks & Regards
Vishnu

I'm also trying to print PRT document with shop papers and still not able to do so. I selected "P" for print on the control key and it should print but still didn't print.
If I understand it right, I think you are trying to do the same.
Have you resolved this issue ?
Thank you,
Sam

Mac Mini & Mac Mini Server

Hi
I would like to know the "suitability" of Mac Mini or Mac Mini Server for web hosting (multiple domain/site) purpose. Some basic assumptions include : budget less than USD$5, user base / concurrent access less than 500, hosted at data centre with average bandwidth (not sure at the moment though).
Basically, I am disappointed with the purchase experience with Windows server. I have ready cash but the reseller seems no so keen. Perhaps, I am not the big spender. I wanted Windows server is because my developer is "brained-wash" in Windows world. He uses the standard PHP, mySQL related stuff. So I am trying to "brain-wash" him to Mac but it's a challenging task for me with little knowledge on the subject matter.
I need to know if Mac Mini and or server is "powerful" as compared with Windows server. I know it is not a very "fair" question but if I know there is very few people use such, then I more or less know the answer.
HTH.

Some things to consider.
The mini server will consume low power, generate little heat, and can be packed densely into a data center, achieving high levels of clustering or redundancy. The flash storage is plenty fast but not spacious. They are also cheap enough to buy two to form a level of redundancy, especially if you are using a load balancer.
However, Mavericks Server no longer includes MySQL. This download you must do yourself. PHP and Apache are present but Apple is not always the fastest to patch these two products. You can replace the stack with a MAMP install which might serve you well. Server.app does not expose all the Apache features that a hosting service may want/need. However, you can edit the conf file manually. If you are planning on giving your customers remote access, FTP is hobbled in Mavericks and you need to do a ton of work (or buy something else) to get multi-tenant chroot.
Regarding "powerful"... If you are using the device for a single task, then the issue falls to the performance of the network card in comparison to your internet connection speed. If you are getting a 100 MB connection then the possible concurrent requests will never saturate the server. This assumes that your HTML and images are optimized and you are not sending out a bunch of 1 MB GIFs. Also, the consideration is Apache vs IIS. Apple provides Apache and a simple interface for "casual" web services, usually one site or to support its own services.
Keep in mind that there are many Linux solutions that exist in which the cost of hardware might be equal to or less than the mini. And in this case, you are getting the raw LAMP stack that you can more fully customize and patch.
Reid
Apple Consultants Network
Apple Professional Services
Author "Mavericks Server – Foundation Services" :: Exclusively available in Apple's iBooks Store

Criticality in recording Credit memo and debit memo using SAPGUI -ECATT

Hi all,
The challenging task for you all guys once again.
Whenever I am recording credit memo or debit memo using SAPGUI(ECATT) driver,I am facing the following troubles.I need all your suggestions to over come it.
1.Depending on the invoice number the number of lineitems in the items-overview will differ.My situation is like,I have to select the lineitem which is editable[All are not editable,only few are editable] among the items available and I have to change values and I have to record those values.
2.Since,the number of lineitems is varying depending upon invoice,I am not able to detect which one is editable or not.Everytime the position of the lineitem will change,as the number of lineitems is changing everytime.
[Please note that SAPGUI is more sensitive to location].
So,I need help how to overcome this situation by SAPGUI
recording (or) Is there anyway of controlling the recording or identifying the item which is editable through ABAP code.
Please suggest on this.

Hi!
Are you sure you are making a testcase, not an interface? Then a BAPI or IDOC would be more suitable.
If you are really interested in a flexible recording, then you have to split this into multiple recordings.
Make one recording for memo creation.
Make one for line editing. Use button 'item on top' to place desired line into first screen line.
Between the two executions you can place some abap for identifying changeable lines - ask your consultants for rules.
Second recording can be used (in a loop) for all line changes.
Maybe there are other ways, would be nice to know.
Regards,
Christian

Challenge Task !!!!!

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for