Conditions difference?

Are the conditions different (1) & (2)?
1)
a.bid = c.id (+) AND
a.sid = c.id (+)
2)
a.bid = c.id OR a.sid = c.id
thanks.

Agrees... ;)

Similar Messages

  • MIRO TRANSACTION - BSX TRANSACTION KEY TAKE PLACE

    Dear Consultants,
    While posting MIRO document, the BSX transaction key is taking place & posting key is 89 apart from WRX transaction key, the figure of (MIRO )WRX transaction key ie the automatic G/L a/c assign in OBYC is matching with WRX transaction key in MIGO.
    pls note that BSX transaction key i.e automatic G/L posting is taking effect in MIGO.( 120000Rs)
    My question is why BSX transaction key ( hardly 200 Rs ) is taking place in MIRO posting, wht was the reason & further there is no invoice condition difference from PO & MIRO.
    Anticipating your advices.

    Hello
    Posting key 89 is for debit and BSX transaction gets debited at the time of MIGO as stock account is getting debited at the time of MIGO.
    WRX is GR/IR clearing and it gets credited at the time of GR.
    In normal cases the debit and credit entry will be for the same amount unless configured otherwise.
    At the time of MIRO WRX gets debited and vendor account gets credited. As you are saying BSX is also coming into play at the time of MIRO, that means some amount is getting into the material accounts in the line item.
    It can happen if you have given unplanned delivery costs (should be Rs.200) and is configured to be distributed among the material account.
    Hope it is clear.
    Regards
    Gregory Mathews

  • Miro posting - BSX transaction key take place

    Dear Consultants,
    While posting MIRO document, the BSX transaction key is taking place & posting key is 89 apart from WRX transaction key, the figure of (MIRO )WRX transaction key ie the automatic G/L a/c assign in OBYC is matching with WRX transaction key in MIGO.
    pls note that BSX transaction key i.e automatic G/L posting is taking effect in MIGO.( 120000Rs)
    My question is why BSX transaction key ( hardly 200 Rs ) is taking place in MIRO posting, wht was the reason & further there is no invoice condition difference from PO & MIRO.
    Anticipating your advices.
    Edited by: vivek tripathi on Sep 26, 2008 6:55 AM

    Hi
    There must be some difference in the PO Value and the Actual invoice received from the Vendor. This difference can be due to various reasons, e.g. difference in Basic Value, or difference in Sales Tax, or even difference in amount of excise duty as that as per the PO condition and as captured in J1IEX
    regards
    Parag Bhargava

  • Comparing the two rows in a table

    I have this kind of data
    ID   Product
    1    P1
    1    P1
    1    P1
    1    P2
    1    P2
    2    P2
    3    P2
    3    P1
    3    P2
    4    P1
    4    P2
    4    P1
    I want to create a report with out using custom SQL or without  modifing exixting universe which will display only the customers who has purchased more P1 than P2
    results should be
    1  P1
    1  P1
    1  P1
    4  P1
    4  P1
    How can i achive this.
    Thanks
    Jeet

    Step 1:
    Insert a column to the right.
    Then insert this formula
    =Count([Product];All) Where ([Product]="P1")
    Press Create Variable Button and name this measure MyCountP1
    Step2
    Insert another column to the right.
    Then insert this formula
    =Count([Product];All) Where ([Product]="P2")
    Press Create Variable Button and name this measure MyCountP2
    Step3
    Insert a third column to the right.
    Then insert this formula
    =[MyCountP1]-[MyCountP2]
    Press Create Variable Button and name this measure Difference
    And finally ....
    Step4
    Press the show/hide filter Pane (the yellow button at the left)
    and gran in your measure Difference and create this condition:
    Difference Greater than or Equal to 1.
    Or if you want all it can be equal to -1
    ( Image at: https://weblogs.sdn.sap.com/weblogs/images/252123862/Dibujo.JPG )
    And delete those three columns because you really don't need them, just the variables
    Edited by: PadawanGirl on Feb 28, 2012 3:42 PM
    Edited by: PadawanGirl on Feb 28, 2012 3:43 PM
    Edited by: PadawanGirl on Feb 28, 2012 3:47 PM

  • Where or Having clause and COUNT(1)

    I'm having trouble trying to figure out the way to get the conditional difference between two counts in a where clause.
    I would like to scan a table and only select records where the record count of one column attribute is different than another.
    I have
    select name, count(1) from skill <<< TOTAL_COUNT
    and
    select name, count(1) from skill where score is not NULL <<<< SCORED_COUNT
    I want to have a statement that just returns the names for those where TOTAL_COUNT - SCORED_COUNT = 0
    ... meaning those names where any of the rows have not been scored.
    I've tried a "having clause" but it still returns all there names. Even those there TOTAL_COUNT - SCORED_COUNT > 0
    Here's the non-working code....
    select * from
    (select full_name
    from emp e
    where e.manager = 'Smith, John'
    having
    ((select count(1)
    from emp_skill es
    where es.emp_fk = e.id
    group by null) -
    (select count(1)
    from emp_skill es1
    where es1.emp_fk = e.id and
    es1.self_prof is not NULL
    group by null)) = 0
    )

    Don't take 3360 too seriously in this context. COUNT(expression) is a bit of a running joke around these parts.
    However, his response does contain the seed of the solution for your problem.
    COUNT(<expression>) works because the COUNT function counts all rows with a non-null value for expression. So COUNT('Chocula') counts the non-null occurences of the literal string 'Chocula' in the table. Obviously, this counts every row in the table. COUNT(*) counts all the non-null occurences of a row in the table (even a row with all null values is a row). Clearly these are equivalent.
    However, if <expression> evaluates differently for each row, then COUNT(*) and COUNT(<expression>) can differ. So, for your example, assuming that the scored column is truly NULL in some records, what you need is something like:
    SQL> SELECT * FROM skill;
    NAME            SCORE
    BOB                 5
    BOB                 6
    BOB                 7
    BILL                5
    BILL                8
    BILL
    SQL> SELECT name, total, scored
      2  FROM (SELECT name, count(*) total, count(score) scored
      3        FROM skill
      4        GROUP BY name)
      5  WHERE total <> scored;
    NAME            TOTAL     SCORED
    BILL                3          2

  • GR IR difference on condition

    Hi frnds,
    My report is to disply the Purchase orders for which the GR and IR are having different values.
    Here I have a contion for whinch if the difference is less then those POs should not disply in the report. So I have created a condition GR - IR  value is greater than 5 and less than -5 then those POs should not disply.
    But here I am facing a problem If for one PO GR is there but no IR so in this case i.e If IR is not there then the PO should come into final report irrespective of the difference between GR - IR value.
    I.e If IR is not there then It should not check the condition.
    How this can be achieved?
    Regards,
    Sridhar

    Hi Sridhra,
    Plz find the details.
    Normally  PO = GR .But IR may be leass than or greater than to u r PO (U can check with MM People for Understanding).
    1. Now you don't want to display the PO values <=IR Values.
    2. If there is no GR you should not dipaly PO Values.
    So use C.K.F to achieve results.
    1st Solution :
    If   PO <= IR
    Result = "    "
    else
    Result = PO.
    As per second Point If IR is not there above condition will not work so it will display all teh PO's
    Regards
    Ramakanth.

  • Differences IRF between Condition SD and Tax code FI

    Hello friends.
    In a specific process, we have two distinct processes (example):
    1) SD Document originary from TM
    Condition YR01 ->  +100.00 - Gross marge for calculation of IRF
    Condition YR02 ->  -15.00    - Tax 2
    Condition YR03 ->  -5.00      - Tax 3
    Condition YR04 ->  +80.00    - net for calculation of IRF
    Tax calculation: 8.00
    2) Invoice Entry (by MM-MIRO)
    Ex.: accounting documents is generated with:
    In Suplly Master Data: IRF Tax Category: IC. IRF Tax Code: C0
    Gross marge for calculation of IRF: +100.00
    Tax calculation: 10.00
    Due to the client's process, we need to compensate the SD document with the accounting documents of FI, but the process cannot be completed because there is a difference in the calculation of the IRF Tax between the two processes.
    According to the client, the source of the document in TM is right, i.e. tax is really 8.00.
    The question is: How to adjust this on FI to consider both tax (YR02 e YR03)?
    I appreciate your attention.
    GLippmann

    I did with depending IRF codes:
    Financial Accounting New -> Financial Account. GL Settings New -> Witholding Tax -> Extended Witholding Tax -> Witholding Tax Base Amounting -> Portray Dependencies between Witholding Tax Type.
    GLippmann

  • What is the difference between Condition Type PB00 and PBXX

    Hallow all,
    Can anybody please explain, What is the Difference between Condition type PB00 and PBXX in Materials Management Pricing?
    And also please explain control or Application of both on Price determination ??
    Thanks in Advance !!!!!

    Hi,
    PB00 condition type is used for automatic pricing in PO
    PBXX condition type is used for manual pricing in PO
    In Pricing  access sequence  play a vital role . If you need pricing automatic in the PO, you have use of Access Sequences and Schema Group of Vendor.You can see the difference in both standard condition type PB00 and PBXX, where as PB00 is assigned to Access sequence(0002)but in case of PBXX no access sequense assigned.
    Regards,
    Biju K

  • Difference in price in PO condition and invoice

    Hi,
    The situation is as follows:
    A PO was created, released and GR done. One item in the PO has quantity 200 KG, price Rs. 100 per KG. So the net price is Rs. 20,000. Now, the price of that item has increased to Rs. 110 per KG, so the total net price would be Rs. 22,000. IR needs to reflect this.
    I was going to reverse the GR for that material using MBST, change the price in the PO item condition and repost GR. But, the stock has all been consumed. Since there is no stock, reversal of GR cannot be done.
    What is the standard method of handling such a case? Should the amount be reflected in the invoice in MIR7 / MIRO? Quantity remains the same, amount has changed. When the PO doument reference is given in MIR7 / MIRO, the system proposes Rs. 20,000 as the amount. If this is changed to Rs. 22,000, the document can be posted, but the difference of Rs. 2000 is being posted to a different G/L. Is this ok? What is the impact on finance? Is there a better way of handling this? Help is appreciated, thanks.
    Regards

    The difference will get posted in Invoice in the Price difference account.
    This is the Standard Process for this kind of the case.

  • Differences between condition FRB1 and FRB2

    Hi,
    I am confused with condition type FRB1 and FRB2. It seems that these 2 condition types have the same setting except that FRB1's AccKey is FR1 while FRB2's is FR2. If I put the same account to both FR1 and FR2 in OBYC, the posted accounts when MIGO are the same.
    So is there any differences between FRB1 and FRB2? Or is there any differences between FR1 and FR2? Or maybe they are only used to post freight to different account?
    Thanks!
    Wesley

    Hi, Manohar
    I checked the thread, and Nikhil indicated that the difference is that for conditions FRB1, we can enter vendor for delivery costs at the time of GR.
    But it's only a field control in condition type. Is there any differences between account key FR1 and FR2?
    Wesley

  • What is the difference using start condition and check function module

    what is the difference  between using start condition and check function module

    That's new to me, I thought a start condition was evaluated before the workflow started, and thus now workflow work item is available. That's why I think the only situation in which start conditions/check functions can't be used, is when the availability of a workflow log for investigation of exactly what stopped the workflow is a requirement.
    I suppose the <a href="http://help.sap.com/saphelp_46c/helpdata/en/4c/86bf43feca11d2a64f0060087a79ea/frameset.htm">SAP documentation</a> is in need of an update.

  • Difference between join conditions using NVL and not using NVL

    Hi,
    I have a join condition in one of the applications as follows.
    NVL(RQ.out_mesg_id,0) = NVL(RS.out_mesg_id,0)How is it different without using NVL function. What is the internal execution difference.
    RQ.out_mesg_id = RS.out_mesg_idWill there be any difference in Performance and also in the query output.
    Regards,
    Pabolu

    Pabolu wrote:
    Hi,
    I have a join condition in one of the applications as follows.
    NVL(RQ.out_mesg_id,0) = NVL(RS.out_mesg_id,0)How is it different without using NVL function. What is the internal execution difference.
    RQ.out_mesg_id = RS.out_mesg_idWill there be any difference in Performance and also in the query output.
    Regards,
    PaboluI suppose that's a bit of a trick question (or could be).
    If the column is allowed to be NULL, then your 2 queries are NOT equivalent, so comparing isn't useful since presumably you can only have one correct result :)
    However, if RQ and RS (no idea what the table names are) are both defined as having a NOT NULL constraint on the column out_mesg_id (ignoring the possibility of column level masking possible with the use of VPD here) then the optimizer could do better if you rewrote the query without the use of NVL (this would of course depend on your tables, indexes, etc ... i am merely showing you that it COULD make a difference).
    SQL> select * from v$version;
    BANNER                                                                         
    Oracle Database 10g Express Edition Release 10.2.0.1.0 - Product               
    PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.1.0 - Production                                         
    CORE     10.2.0.1.0     Production                                                     
    TNS for 32-bit Windows: Version 10.2.0.1.0 - Production                        
    NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.1.0 - Production                                         
    SQL>
    SQL> create table t1 as
      2  select level as col1, case when mod(level, 10) = 0 then null else mod(level, 10) end as col2
      3  from dual connect by level <= 1000;
    Table created.
    SQL>
    SQL> alter table t1 add constraint t1_pk primary key (col1);
    Table altered.
    SQL>
    SQL> create index t1_i_001 on t1 (col2);
    Index created.
    SQL>
    SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(user, 'T1', cascade => true);
    PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
    SQL>
    SQL> create table t2 as
      2  select level as col1, case when mod(level, 100) = 0 then null else mod(level, 100) end as col2
      3  from dual connect by level <= 1000;
    Table created.
    SQL>
    SQL> alter table t2 add constraint t2_pk primary key (col1);
    Table altered.
    SQL>
    SQL> create index t2_i_001 on t2 (col2);
    Index created.
    SQL>
    SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(user, 'T2', cascade => true);
    PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
    SQL>
    SQL> --query using NVL
    SQL> explain plan for
      2  select count(*)
      3  from t1, t2
      4  where nvl(t1.col1, 0) = nvl(t2.col1, 0)
      5  /
    Explained.
    SQL>
    SQL> SELECT * FROM table(DBMS_XPLAN.DISPLAY);
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT                                                              
    Plan hash value: 663667122                                                     
    | Id  | Operation              | Name  | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT       |       |     1 |     8 |     5  (20)| 00:00:01 |
    |   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE        |       |     1 |     8 |            |          |
    |*  2 |   HASH JOIN            |       |  1000 |  8000 |     5  (20)| 00:00:01 |
    |   3 |    INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| T1_PK |  1000 |  4000 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |   4 |    INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| T2_PK |  1000 |  4000 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT                                                              
    Predicate Information (identified by operation id):                            
       2 - access(NVL("T1"."COL1",0)=NVL("T2"."COL1",0))                           
    16 rows selected.
    SQL>
    SQL> --verbose version of NVL
    SQL> explain plan for
      2  select count(*)
      3  from t1, t2
      4  where t1.col1 = t2.col1
      5  or ( (t1.col1 is null and t2.col1 = 0) or (t2.col1 is null and t1.col1 = 0) or (t1.col1 is null and t2.col1 is null) )
      6  /
    Explained.
    SQL>
    SQL> SELECT * FROM table(DBMS_XPLAN.DISPLAY);
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT                                                              
    Plan hash value: 1043818223                                                    
    | Id  | Operation              | Name  | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT       |       |     1 |     8 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE        |       |     1 |     8 |            |          |
    |   2 |   NESTED LOOPS         |       |  1000 |  8000 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |   3 |    INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| T1_PK |  1000 |  4000 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |*  4 |    INDEX UNIQUE SCAN   | T2_PK |     1 |     4 |     0   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT                                                              
    Predicate Information (identified by operation id):                            
       4 - access("T1"."COL1"="T2"."COL1")                                         
    16 rows selected.So if we compare the 'verbose' version of the query, in the "predicate information" section of the explain you can see that the optimizer was able to completely ignore the
    or ( (t1.col1 is null and t2.col1 = 0) or (t2.col1 is null and t1.col1 = 0) or (t1.col1 is null and t2.col1 is null) ) condition since it knows that neither t1.col1 NOR t2.col1 columns can be null (by definition), and because of this we get a slightly different index access choice.

  • Difference Between (MINUS and NOT IN ) conditions

    Hi all,
    I am using oracle 10gR2 on AIX.
    I am running a sql query and getting some strange results from this.
    Select dw_cell_id
    from cell_sites cs
    where cs.valid_flg = 'Y'
    and cs.dw_cell_id not in
    (select distinct dm.dw_cell_id
    from cell_sites_dim dm)
    Above query is returning zero records. Note that DW_CELL_ID column is number data type.
    When I use MINUS condition instead of NOT IN it return me few records.
    select dw_cell_id
    from cell_sites cs
    where cs.valid_flg = 'Y'
    minus
    select distinct dm.dw_cell_id
    from cell_sites_dim dm
    Can any one tell me whats the difference between these two scenarios. Why i am unable to get the results from first statement.
    Thanks
    Farooq

    Hi all,
    I am using oracle 10gR2 on AIX.
    I am running a sql query and getting some strange
    results from this.
    Select dw_cell_id
    from cell_sites cs
    where cs.valid_flg = 'Y'
    and cs.dw_cell_id not in
    (select distinct dm.dw_cell_id
    from cell_sites_dim dm)In this query, check that you are using "AND" operator. This means it will check for tha correctness of both the conditions. This will return only that row which has valid_flg='Y' and its dw_cell_id is not in cell_sites_dim.... ANd there may be no such records matching both the conditions.
    When I use MINUS condition instead of NOT IN it
    return me few records.
    select dw_cell_id
    from cell_sites cs
    here cs.valid_flg = 'Y'
    minus
    select distinct dm.dw_cell_id
    from cell_sites_dim dm
    ------------------------------------------------In this,, you are using "Minus". In this firstly first query will fetch records having valid_flag='Y' and fromthose record it will minus the record which are in cell_sites_dim. So there can be records in cell_sites which have valid_flag='Y' but thay are not in cell_sites_dim.
    hope you get the point.
    There in symentic error in you query nothing else.
    regards,
    Navneet
    >
    Can any one tell me whats the difference between
    these two scenarios. Why i am unable to get the
    results from first statement.
    Thanks
    FarooqHI

  • I have a fully functioning iPhone 4S that has been in water, it has left slight water marks on screen, everything else works and is in mint condition. I want to exchange it for an iphone 5s and pay the difference. Would this be possible at the apple store

    I have a fully functioning iPhone 4S in mint condition apart some water marks on screen (dropped in bath) everything works perfectly as it should. I wish to exchange and pay the difference for an iphone 5s. Is this possible from the apple store (uk) how much do they normally give as a trade in and how much do they charge for an iphone 5s. Or should I just take it in and see if they will do a one for one swap and pay the difference. ( I don't like the water marks, it's annoying, maybe they will go away, I don't know) been sat in rice for a week.

    The only thing Apple will do for you is an out of warranty exchange, & you will get EXACTLY what you have now. The cost will be US $199. Make an appointment at any Apple store.

  • Condition.await and LockSupport.park differences

    What are the differences between
    java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.park()
    and
    java.util.concurrent.locks.Condition.await()?
    From the API it seems they have the same behaviour:
    "Disables the current thread for thread scheduling purposes unless the permit is available..." for the first,
    "Causes the current thread to wait until it is signalled or interrupted..." for the second.
    Are they equals? If no, what are the differences? Can they be used together, for example:
    class MyClass {
         Lock lock;
            Condition condition;
            Handler handler;
             //constructor
             MyClass() {
                   // initializes and then starts handler
            public void method1() {
                    // do something...
                    LockSupport.unpark(handler);
                    condition.signal();
            private class Handler extends Thread {
              public void run(){
                            while (true) {
                        while(! something) {
                             try {
                                  LockSupport.park();
                                  condition.await();
                                  // do something
                             } catch (InterruptedException e) {
    }

    Many of classed and interfaces in the java.util.concurrent package are used as building blocks for
    higher level concurrency supporting classes. In particular, Condition object is associated with
    Lock object and a single Lock can have multiple Conditions hereby enabling single Lock object
    having multiple wait sets(await/unlock pairs). LockSupport class only provides one single such
    pair through its simple static methods.

Maybe you are looking for