Cross system object lock -how to build up lock entries for existing request

Hello,
we implemented ChaRM for some years and  intend to activate cross system object lock (CSOL), now.
But there are a lot of existing transport requests, which have not been imported to productive system, yet.
It would be very helpful to create lock entries for objects, which are assigned to those transport requests.
Does anyone know any standard report for this purpose?
Thanks a lot for any hint.
Best regards
Horst

If anyone else needs that feature:
Report TMW_TRKORR_LOCK_UPDATE (executed in satellite system) will lock the objects of a transport request in solution manager system.

Similar Messages

  • ChaRM cross system object lock

    Anyone have any experience with the cross system object lock in ChaRM? If so, can I get your thoughts on how well it works and your likes/dislikes?
    I read the help.sap.com page. I'm looking fto hear about people's experiences.
    regards,
    Jason

    bump.

  • Error whiel activating cross system object lock

    Hi ,
    when I am trying to activate the cross system object lock functionality for developement system in tcode /TMWFLOW/CMSCONF  from our solman system , it showing the following error
    'Error RFC destination SM_SMDCLNT000_TRUSTED: You are not authorized to logon to the target system (error code 1).
    Message no. /TMWFLOW/TRACK_N106'
    In the above RFC connection the 'Current user' is provided.
    Can anyone please let me know what I am missing in this?

    Hi Farzan,
        I dont have autorization in Client 000 of SMD system thats why its giving authorization error but when I am trying to activate the object locking for SMD client 321 why the system is trying to logging into the SMD : 000 can we somewhere modify the RFC conection which needs to be used.
    Regards,
    Amar Kamat

  • Charm without Cross system object lock

    Dear All,
    We have requirement for configuration of Charm without cross system object lock i.e. solution manager will be used for documentation but create, release, import request from the development system itself.
    Can we make changes in the functionality and use charm for documentation only?
    if anyone has the same requirement can you please let me know steps to be followed.
    Thanks in advance
    Regards
    Sushant

    Dear Prabhakar,
    Thanks for the reply.
    Our project has just gone live and issues immediate resolution is being carried. Charm will integrate with system and training is required for that which at this point of time not possible but at the same time without affecting the issue resolution we want to log the changes in solution manager.
    We will use the CSOL feature may be some time later.
    At present i have not activate CSOL, still the document doesn't flow through. Document got stuck at "In development" phase and doesn't move forward. It doesn't allow to change the status.
    Regards
    Sushant

  • Cross System Object Lock with ChaRM Retrofit

    Hi-
    I need to know if there is the ability to have a cross system object lock while utiliziing Retrofit within ChaRM. For example I am working with an N, N1 landscape. When I release a transport request in N I need the object to be locked in the N, and N1 (after retrofit) landscapes.
    Will this be supported with both Workbench and Customizing requests?

    I dont believe this is possible at the moment. As you must be already aware, that SAP releases the locks from the objects as soon as the transport request is released from the Development System. Unless, this locking mechanism is extended to various systems first (DEV and QAS) and later to parallel landscapes (eg:- Project landscapes) it would be difficult to bring in this feature.
    Rgds,
    Abhijeet Bhagat

  • Cross System object lock

    We have implemented Charm in Solman 7.0 Ehp1. I have activated 'cross system object lock' both globally (report tmwflow/config_services) and in satellite System (tcode- /n/tmwflow/cmsconf). am able to change the same table again which i had edited earlier and stored in TR.
    am i missing somewhere.
    Thanks

    Hello Powai,
    Please, check the link below, there you can find good informations about CSOL.
    /people/rajiv.jha/blog/2010/08/30/csol-managing-parallel-projects
    Best Regards,
    Diego Fischer

  • ChaRM:Cross system object lock:Ovelapping

    Hi Friends,
    In SE38, while activating the service "/TMWFLOW/CONFIG_SERVICES", i am seeing following conflict scenarios:
    Cross-Project, Client Specifi, Ovelapping
    Cross-Project, Client Specifi, Partial Ovelapping
    What is the meaning of overlapping? In which scenario it can be used?
    Thnaks for your input
    PSK

    Hi
    There is a feature call cross object locking in solman it is used for that
    you can check below note for all the available modes
    Note 981729 - Cross-system object lock: Alternative lock modes
    Hope it solved ur basic doubt
    Regards
    Prakhar

  • Cross system object lock (CSOL)

    Hi there,
    I am trying to set up CSOL and in the SolMan-help,  they talk about the CSOL monitor in SolMan.
    But what report or tx do I need to start it ?
    PS SolMan 4.0 SP6
    "In the central SAP Solution Manager system, the cross-system object lock monitor provides an overview of all current lock entries. The entries are presented in table form, and can be selected if you need to delete them, for example"
    regards
    Steven

    Hi Steven,
    the tcode is called /tmwflow/lockmon.
    Regards,
    uDo

  • Cross system object lock after SP24 upgrade

    Hi Team,
    We have recently updated from Sol Man SP23 to SP24. I have set-up cross system object lock (CSOL) in SP23. It was working perfectly.
    When we are in SP23, i have made following settings:
    In T.code: u201C/TMWFLOW/CONFIG_SERVICESu201D , i have set he conflict analysis as "Cross-Project, Cross-Client". So i that i will always get "Warning" Messge while processing SDHF and SDMJ correction.
    In t.code: /n/TMWFLOW/CMSCONF , the CSOL is active.
    Recently we have upgraded to SP24. After SP24 upgrade, the CSOL is not working properly. The configurations are same as earlier.(Before SP24). Now if i process SDMJ or SDHF corrections, the CSOL always gives me "ERROR" message but i want to get "WARNING" message as earlier. I have checked the conflict analysis in t.code u201C/TMWFLOW/CONFIG_SERVICES". It is still "Cross Project, Cross-Client" only.
    Any additinal SAP notes to be implemrnted to correct this behaviour.
    Your valuable guidance required.
    Thanks
    Kumar

    I dont believe this is possible at the moment. As you must be already aware, that SAP releases the locks from the objects as soon as the transport request is released from the Development System. Unless, this locking mechanism is extended to various systems first (DEV and QAS) and later to parallel landscapes (eg:- Project landscapes) it would be difficult to bring in this feature.
    Rgds,
    Abhijeet Bhagat

  • Cross system object locking -Object editor popup does not show in dev sys

    Hi ,
    we want to use the cross system locking for r/3 system .
    we have done all the configuration required for cross system object locking in central solution manager system and also in development r/3 system .
    also we observed that object lock information is avaible in central lock monitor transcation but when ever there is object lcok it does not show us the the popup for object editing. 
    appreciate your valuable inputs.
    Regards,
    Amar Kamat

    We found the problem.
    The structure was being locked by a user in the QA system and overnight the M version finally activated after another transport attempt. 
    The second structure with this problem was only referenced as a local object (even though it had a proper tech name and package assignment) preventing its activation in the QA system.  We needed to hack the query tables to make it look like a proper global structure, then re-transported and it activated.

  • CSOL Cross System Object Lock - RFC error in satellite system

    Hi
    We are currently implementing Solution Manager 7.1 (ChaRM) and of the mandatory requirements is to activate Cross System Object Lock.
    I have globally activated this in Solman and have gone into /TMWFLOW/CMSCONF to activate for our development client. This is now activated.
    A transport has now been created in ChaRM and I login to the above mentioned development system and make a customizing change. I then choose the transport and save change. I am presented with an error:
    "Error in RFC SM_DSMCLNT001_BACK to Solution Manager System" (Message No. STMWFLOW025)
    I have now been looking at this for a few hours and found OSS Note 824521. However, I have already done all this. From a RFC perspective we have:
    SOLMAN:
    SM_DSMCLNT001_BACK - works fine in SM59. The assigned user has all the correct profiles.
    In transaction SDCCN, the above RFC appears also.
    In transaction SM30, table BCOS_CUST, "CHARM_DEST" and "OSS_MSG" are both set to destination NONE.
    SATELLITE SYSTEM:
    In transaction SDCCN, the above mentioned RFC exists
    In transaction SM30, table BCOS_CUST, "CHARM_DEST" and "OSS_MSG" are both set to the above mentioned RFC
    The user SMB_DSM for the RFC only exists in Solman and not in satellite system. Don't think this is needed though.
    As soon as I deactivate CSOL in /TMWFLOW/CMSCONF in Solman (for development client), I can make changes and the above error (in red) does not appear. However, we needed CSOL working and this error not to appear.
    Any suggestions???
    Thanks
    Shaun

    Ok, the resolution was to ensure SMB_X82 (in Solman) has the following roles and profiles:
    Roles
    SAP_SOLMANTMWCOL
    Z_SOLMAN_BACK
    Profiles
    D_SOLMAN_RFC
    S_BDLSM_READ
    S_CSMREG
    S_CUS_CMP
    S_SD_CREATE
    S_TMW_ADMIN
    This resolved my issue.
    Thanks
    Shaun

  • Advice on how to build a business case for partitioning

    Hi Everyone,
    I'm the architect of a business intelligence/data warehouse team. We've grown to the point where I believe we need database partitioning. I believe we are at about 1.5 TB of data. Our largest tables are in the 100 million row counts with relatively wide record lengths (~100 columns). Our just sort of large tables are in the 10 million to 50 million range, however, they have very long row lengths (~300 columns). Based on our future source system plans, our data will become even more granular and there is still a need to maintain our historical data.
    Those aren't the only reasons, but are some of the larger driving issues that are making most members of our team think it's time we purchased database partitioning. Our team is pretty unanimous for partitioning, many of our source system partners also consider it a "no-brainer", however, we're getting push back from our CIO saying that 1.5 TB and 100 million records isn't that much data as compared to other "big data" companies and that it doesn't require partitioning.
    Does anyone have a advice on how to build an business case for purchasing partitioning? Is there a good way to demonstrate cost-vs-benefit value?
    Thanks for your feedback.
    -=Joe

    I'm going to be contrarian and start from the end of your post.
    >
    Does anyone have a advice on how to build an business case for purchasing partitioning? Is there a good way to demonstrate cost-vs-benefit value?
    >
    Yes - forget about cost-vs-benefit. That's the CIOs job not yours. You're an architect. Stick to architecture. Design and implement the architecture needed to meet the business requirements of your projects. If you are given requirements that can't be met with your current infrastructure then that is when you should propose alternative infrastructure.
    >
    We've grown to the point where I believe we need database partitioning. I believe we are at about 1.5 TB of data. Our largest tables are in the 100 million row counts with relatively wide record lengths (~100 columns). Our just sort of large tables are in the 10 million to 50 million range, however, they have very long row lengths (~300 columns). Based on our future source system plans, our data will become even more granular and there is still a need to maintain our historical data.
    Those aren't the only reasons, but are some of the larger driving issues that are making most members of our team think it's time we purchased database partitioning.
    >
    NONSENSE! That's what ALL of the above statements represent - UTTER AND ABSOLUTE NONSENSE.
    Who cares what you believe? Beliefs don't carry weight, facts do. You do list some facts: 1.5 TB of data, 100 million row counts, wide record lengths, large sorts, long rows, data will get more granular, need to maintain historical data.
    Ho Hum! So what? How do ANY of those facts indicate any sort of issue or problem, existing or potential, at all? They don't. You haven't provided information that suggests that ANY of those facts illustrate what Justin referred to as 'pain points'.
    Unless those facts prevent you from doing your job of providing an architecture that meets the business requirements you don't have a leg to stand on.
    My first reaction to your request would be similar to your cio's. Implicit in your cio's response are some questions you need to ask and answer
    1. What is it that you do now that you can't do with the current architecture?
    2. What is it that you need to do for an upcoming requirement that you can't do with the current architecture?
    3. What alternatives are available to modify the current architecture to do what can't be done in items #1 and #2 above?
    That #3 is where my skepticism lies. You seem to have already concluded that partitioning is the answer. Why? What problems do you think it will solve? Why not RAC? Why not a separate data warehouse system? Why not split that historical data off into an OLAP system? Maybe that can reduce the size of the OLTP system to where you won't have whatever problems you are having.
    Partitioning is just about addressing some performance issues. A lot of times partitioning is used more for management purposes such as loading/offloading data without impacting those huge tables you are talking about.
    If my hot queries use a primary key value to retrieve data it isn't going to matter much if the tables are partitioned or not.
    That is what sets the context for what Justin is telling you. You and your team need to document the constraints (and SLAs) your system currently has, how close you are to hitting those constraints, your options for avoiding/evading those constraints using the current infrastructure and the options for avoiding/evading those constraints using a modified architecture.
    It is up to the CIO to do the cost-benefit analysis of working within the limits imposed by the current infrastructure versus modifiying the architecture.

  • How to create the new varients for existing generic article.

    Hi all,
          Can any body tell how can i create new varients for existing generic article
        T-Code - MM41 ( IS-Retail).
       Plz help, helpful answers will be rewarded.
    Regards,
    Sai

    Hi
    If you have access to the program of the tcode, then go to that tcode click on system->status, to get the program name, go to se38 give that program name and select variants radiobutton, create the variant.
    Regards
    Haritha.

  • Lock: Can't get shadow database entry for root

    Hi all--
    posting this here since I'm having trouble with a Solaris release version and not OpenSolaris. Plus, Rich makes it pretty clear not to bug him with questions about this program! :-D
    Anyway I've been using Rich Teer's lock program on Solaris 10 (and 9) and it's been great. http://www.rite-group.com/rich/sw/lock.html
    But now that I've built a new machine with the latest general Solaris 10 x86 release (Solaris 10 8/07 s10x_u4wos_12b X86) the portion of lock that gets info from the shadow file doesn't seem to work:
    if I enter the incorrect password (to either lock or lock -p) I get:
    lock: Can't get shadow database entry for root: Error 0
    Rich discusses the background on his lock program in this article:
    http://developers.sun.com/solaris/articles/program_privileges.html
    ...but it's over my head.
    Anyone have some guidance on this? I'd really like to use this program in my work environment. thanks! ..and happy Thanksgiving!
    -Matt

    Futher information on this problem OS is Windows XP PRO SP2
    Jer, I have tried stopping and stating the database many times to no avail. I even stop the listener first before trying a restart, see below
    I need some one to tell me what or where to look next Are there log files could I have some sort of trace report that might tell me more etc...?
    M:\oraclexe\app\oracle\product\10.2.0\server\BIN>net start OracleXETNSListener
    The requested service has already been started.
    More help is available by typing NET HELPMSG 2182.
    M:\oraclexe\app\oracle\product\10.2.0\server\BIN>net start OracleServiceXE
    The OracleServiceXE service is starting........................................
    The OracleServiceXE service was started successfully.
    M:\oraclexe\app\oracle\product\10.2.0\server\BIN>netstat -a
    Active Connections
    Proto Local Address Foreign Address State
    TCP HPPavillonXP:135 HPPavillonXP:0 LISTENING
    TCP HPPavillonXP:445 HPPavillonXP:0 LISTENING
    TCP HPPavillonXP:1521 HPPavillonXP:0 LISTENING
    TCP HPPavillonXP:1981 HPPavillonXP:0 LISTENING
    TCP HPPavillonXP:2869 HPPavillonXP:0 LISTENING
    TCP HPPavillonXP:1025 HPPavillonXP:0 LISTENING
    TCP HPPavillonXP:1045 HPPavillonXP:0 LISTENING
    TCP HPPavillonXP:1048 HPPavillonXP:0 LISTENING
    TCP HPPavillonXP:139 HPPavillonXP:0 LISTENING
    TCP HPPavillonXP:1389 by2m6-cs99.msgr.hotmail.com:1863 ESTABLISHED
    TCP HPPavillonXP:139 HPPavillonXP:0 LISTENING
    UDP HPPavillonXP:445 *:*
    UDP HPPavillonXP:500 *:*
    UDP HPPavillonXP:1030 *:*

  • HOW to enable oracle advance compression for EXIST partitioned table

    Hi All,
    I have to enable oracle advance compression for existing table which PARTITION BY RANGE then SUBPARTITION BY HASH.
    ORacle version: 11.2.0.2.0
    Please provide me any relevant doc or any exp.
    Thanks in advance.

    could not see any text for how to enable oracle advance compression for EXIST partitioned table.RTFM.
    From the resource above:
    How do I compress an existing table?
    There are multiple options available to compress existing tables. For offline compression, one could use ALTER TABLE Table_Name MOVE COMPRESS statement. A compressed copy of an existing table can be created by using CREATE TABLE Table_Name COMPRESS FOR ALL OPERATIONS AS SELECT *. For online compression, Oracle’s online redefinition utility can be used. More details for online redefinition are available here.
    "

Maybe you are looking for