EUL version 3.1.13 in a 4.1.x enviroment

Hey there.
This is an interesting - and perplexing - one to me.
I'm combining 2 EULs together into 1. All that's fine, but where I'm surprised is that I'm running Disco client 4.1.48.08.
When I run the following SQL query:
SELECT 'EUL_OWNER' which_eul,
a.ver_eul_timestamp,
a.ver_min_code_ver,
a.ver_release,
a.ver_sa,
a.ver_name,
a.ver_description
FROM eul_owner.eul_versions a
UNION
SELECT 'EUL_US' which_eul,
a.ver_eul_timestamp,
a.ver_min_code_ver,
a.ver_release,
a.ver_sa,
a.ver_name,
a.ver_description
FROM eul_us.eul4_versions a
I compare the 2 eul versions. EUL_US comes back with a version of: 4.1.14.0.0 (that's good) while the other EUL - EUL_OWNER comes back with a version of: 3.1.13.0.0.
There's no problem on the export from 3 to the import of 4 (well I'm assuming there's no problem) but does anyone know how this even works correctly?
I thought that if you try to connect 4.1x to a 3.1x EUL, it would automatically say it's out of date and to upgrade - or is this only when I connect into the 3.1x EUL as the EUL owner (ie: database owner)?
Just wondering if anyone had seen this as I don't see why it's never made the 3.1x EUL to be upgraded.
Thanks.
Russ

Forget it ... must be the drugs ...
I see in that particular EUL schema that there is an EUL_VERSIONS table and also an EUL_EUL4_VERSIONS table.
Actually, the closer I look there are alot of tables from the non-4 version (3.x) and the 4 version (4.x).
Therefore, on the upgrade from v3 to v4, it wasn't a destructive upgrade (good), but the v4 files were not put in another schema which I guess makes sense but just makes it difficult for someone (ie: me) years after the fact to see.
So, no probs, just have to learn to look at all the tables in the schema!
Russ

Similar Messages

Discoverer eul version

hello
been using discoverer 4.1.37
i'm testing the upgrade to 4.1.48 but when i connect to the EUL i'm not getting any "EUL needs upgrading" messages.
can you confirm what the eul version should be for discoverer 4.1.48
when i look at the eul4_versions table it says 4.1.14
cheers

Going back a bit in my memory, but I'm sure I remember that the 4.1.48 upgrade did indeed need a new EUL as many changes were made - a way better version.
Once you're on 4.1.48, I believe you can't go back down to the lower version either, due to the same reason; new features, etc. added that weren't supported before.
The key issue for you is not that it needs a new EUL, but when you upgrade your existing EUL, is it a destructive upgrade or not? In otherwords, does it create a entirely different brand spankin' new EUL, or does it alter the old one.
Alter the old one and you've got problems if people are using the old one. A new one and you can test it to your hearts content and migrate reports into the new one before turning off the old one.
I'm 99% sure it's not a destructive upgrade and indeed, creates an entirely new EUL. Maybe someone can add in if they're 100% certain.
Russ

Difference between EUL versions 5.0.2 vs 5.1.1

Hi!
Can someone tell me what I gain if I upgrade from 5.0.2.0.0.0 to 5.1.1.0.0.0?
I mostly use Discoverer Desktop (migrating would require 100 instalations), but I might also start developing reports in olap (PLUS).
Is there any white paper on this?
Thank you
Gor

Ahh, well that clarifies that, thanks for yourhelp,
the last three of you anyway...typical that
the
guy
with an unhealthy post count made such a
totally
unhelpful and inane comment...Perhaps you simply didn't understand it?You have two choices:
1. Disregard the comment.
2. Ignore the comment.You forgot:
3. Respond to the comment.No, I didn't. Was the comment worth responding? Especially from grandpa, who at best is known to deny even if he is wrong.

Discoverer with OWB generated EULs

i configure my warehouse star schema using OWB (warehouse builder 9i release 2) and generated the EUL. the were some warnings but they were pointing to some invalid characters in the names of the objects but the import succeeded.
i could see all the imported definition from OWB using Discoverer Admin (also iDS Release 2 - EUL version 5).
sample of my star schema:-
fact table
salesman_id
product_id
sales_amt
dimension
salesman (which also contains salesman name attribute)
product (which also contains product description attribute)
so, i can see the Discoverer joins from the fact to the dimension tables.
when i create a workbook (report) using Discoverer Desktop, i faced the following problems:-
if i just have Salesman (ID or Description) as a row, everything is fine.
if i add in the Product ID, it still works as per normal.
but when i add Product Description into the report, i experienced a weird behaviour. somehow, the Salesman ID field will be automatically filtered to show only a certain number of records in the result (less than what it initially was) !
usually if you put field in the Page Items section you will have to select to view <All> records, right ? citing the scenario i just mentioned above, i will only see some record values ... i won't see the <All> displayed for me to choose.
has this got to do with the foreign key relationship from the Fact table's Product ID field to the Product Dimension table ? it worked for the Salesman dimension !!
the only thing different about the product dimension is the product id field is VARCHAR2 length 18. you could have numeric values like 000000000012345678 (numbers are padded with zeros to make up 18 chars) and alphanumeric values like MAT_TG12345 (which are not padded with anything - left-justified). i could set that the report would only retrieve the records which has product id matching the numeric values !
any ideas ?
thanks to anyone who is kind enough to read this lengthy post and reply it :)

It would appear that you do not have integrity between the fact and the product dimension.
Does the foriegn key exisit in the database (deployed) or is it only in the OWB repository (not deployed).
Two thing:-
Try changin the join to an outer join.
Take the sql from the View SQL drop down option and run in another SQL Editor.
Neil

Comand line: EUL upgrade error

Hi All,
I am running the following from command line...
dis51usr.exe/connect user1/pswd@prod1 /opendb test_ap /sheet test_ap_sheet /batch /export xls c:\carlson\1.xls
But It doesn't create the export file output at the given path.
If i try to run the partial command:
dis51usr.exe/connect user1/pswd@prod1 /opendb test_ap /sheet test_ap_sheet
It pops up the disco Desktop and gives the following error:
You must upgrade your EUL tables to use this software release. Please contact your discoverer manager.
Please help, it's urgent.
Thanks...

It sounds like your Discoverer EUL version is out of sync with the Discoverer client software that you are using to connect. Are you connecting to a 4i EUL with a 9i client?
Can you find out what Discoverer EUL version you have...?
You can see the Discoverer client version by clicking on "About.." in Discoverer Desktop and Discoverer Admin when the log in box pops up.
Maria

SQL Query to find Discoverer version installed

Hi ,
As a developer, Is there a back-end DB sql query (or script) that can be run on DB to find the version of Oracle Discoverer installed?
Will the query be different if Discoverer is used with Oracle Applications (R12.1.3) as compared to a Discoverer running on a plain stand alone Oracle Database (no Oracle apps)?
thanks,
gg.

Hello gg
The VER_NAME and VER_DESCRIPTION are typically never filled in and can be ignnored.
The VER_RELEASE is the EUL version as you rightly summised. This version is 100% compatible with Discoverer 11g and if you already have it you can upgrade from 10g to 11g without changing anything in the EUL
VER_MIN_CODE_VER is the minimum version of Oracle Discoverer that can be used with this EUL. In this case 10.1.2.45.20 is 10g Release 2
VER_EUL_TIMESTAMP is the date and time this version of the EUL was released by Oracle - again you can ignore it
The important fields therefore are the VER_RELEASE and VER_MIN_CODE_VER
Hope this helps
Best wishes
Michael

Unable to Migrate Reports Created in Beta Version to Release Version

I am new to Crystal Reports and apologize for my ignorance. I could really use some help with a very frustrting problem though. I began using Crystal Reports last September with the Beta version available at the time for Visual Studio 2010. I created a number of reports that worked fine.
Recently, I became aware of the official release and thought I should install it before attempting to publish my application. After considerable challenges trying remove the Beta Version from my computer I was finally able to remove it and get the official release installed. Unfortunately, when I opened my project in Visual Studio I received a message that my solution was created with an older or unknown version of Crystal Reports. It gave me the option to convert the solution which I tried to do. The conversion immediately displayed this error "An error occurred while attempting to load the Crystal Reports runtime. Either the Crystal Reports registry key permissions are insufficient, or the Crystal Reports runtime is not installed correctly. Please install the appropriate Crystal Reports redistributable (CRRedist*.msi) containing the correct version of the Crystal Reports runtime (x86, x64 or ltanium) required. Please go to http://www.businessobjects.com/support for more informatio."
Running the conversion also wiped out the contents of the *.cs files for each of my reports.
I tried to open the project without converting the reports but I still received the above error.
I have read a number of posts about similar issues. Many, however, involve deploying the application on a user machine. I am simply trying to access my project in Visual Studio IDE. I did change the platform target for my project to x86 (several posts described this as a solution) but it had no impact.
I did try to install and run the CRRedist program but continued to receive the error. I downloaded the complete package (exe) and the Redist Installation (32 bit) from the SAP Knowledge Center. I did originally create the reports with my Application Target framework set to .Net Framework 3.5 and have since changed that to .Net Framework 4. I tried changing it back to 3.5 but still received the error. I am running Vista as my operating system.
I would greatly appreciate any help you can provide. I really want to use Crystal Reports as my reporting tool but can't afford to waste days trying to resolve these types of issues.

Sorry me, previous post i wrong say 10.1.3 and is 10.1.2.3.
If you are at 10.1.2.3 version, it could be a problem with the DISPLAY enviroment variable. You must be sure that X11 services are running fine on the server.
Try this:
$ export DISPLAY=:0.0
$ xclock
Wait about 5 minutes, if you do not receive error, do this at the same session:
$ opmnctl stopall
$ opmnctl startall
Test Oracle Report.
If you get an error at xclock command, you must activate X11 services at your server or use a X11 services emulator like Reflection, Exceed at your PC, and set DISPLAY variable with PC's IP address.
Regards
David Duenas.
Edited by: David Duenas on Jul 20, 2009 1:57 PM

Migartion of older version of Business Objects to XI R3

Hi Experts,
<<Text removed by moderator>>
Also need to know about how to create windows AD security or how to move users from enterprise to windows AD security group.
Awaiting replies asap.
Regards
Rohit Mathur
Edited by: Matt on Dec 6, 2010 10:18 AM

Hi,
Firstly am moving Business Objects Versions 5.x and 6.x to XI R3 enviroment,secondaly i have done all the things as per the points that you have mentioned in the forum but the deal is i just wanna know about what all crdentials will be asked for during the migartion process and also want to about the BO MAIN KEY as it is also asked for to access the respective BUSINESS OBJECTS version repository.
And i have some reports which are scheduled so when i migrate is there any option to keep the schedule instances as it is or I will have to reschedule all the reports again after the migration.
Is there any option to migrate the inbox..?
Thanks for the process you told me about the AD security group i am cleared with that thing,i will foloow as per say.

Discoverer 9.0.2 vith EULv5 and OracleApps11.5.7... compatible??

I am aware that the apps 11.5.7 are distributed with 9iAS 1.0.2.2
and that Discoverer 9.0.2 works with 9iAS Release2.
If I install a second 9iAS to connect to the same Apps Database, will that conflict?
After that, if I create an EUL version 5 over the business views generated from the apps 11.5.7, will that be working, compatible??
We have not bought any BIS module, has anyone been able to have the confirmation that one can use the file BISeul.eex as an EUL?

Dblink between 32 bit and 64 bin oracle should work fine.
Regards

Oracle Discoverer Viewer will not display in browser

Hi,
I tried using the link below to get to discoverer viewer but it is not working. I can access Oracle Enterprise Manager without any problem.
Could you please help me with that.
Thanks,
Vani
===========================================
Start a Web browser and enter the Discoverer Plus URL containing the fully qualified host name (including port number if necessary) used by your own installation.
For example:
http://machinename.myorganization.com:7777/discoverer/plus
Where:
machinename.myorganization is the hostname and domain on which the Oracle HTTP Server is installed
7777 (optional) is the port number on which the Oracle HTTP Server is installed if the default port number (i.e. port 80) has been changed
/discoverer/plus is the URL command that starts Discoverer Plus

I am using oracle 9iAS on Windows 2000 Professional.
Database is the one created from the Oracle 9iAS CD that holds the 9iAS Infrastructure.
I have tried using both Netscape 7.1 and Internet Explorer 6.
At this moment, I am hosting database, Application server and browser on this test machine.
I am starting to believe that may be I do not have the correct EUL version but I have used Oracle IDs to create the EUL. It is version 5.x.x. I am not at the location so I cannot give the exact EUL version.
Thanks,
Vani

Unable to view Business areas even after giving administrator rights

Hi All,
I have been given permission as administrator i.e all privileges are given. All roles have been selected for that particular user. When I tried to access the userid I get a message 'Does not have access to any EULs ...' . But when my administrator logs in with my user id he did not get any error.
The only difference I am able to find is the EUL version. The EUL version from his administrator edition is 4.1.37.00.0. Whereas when I log in with my administrator edition the EUL version is 5i. Will the EUL version make the difference. Or will there be any other reason. If so what is the step to overcome?
thanks in advance.
Prabhu

Hi,
When you can't access to a business area is due to the user hasn't permission for Database tables. You can have two identical Discoverer users and one can access to a business area and the other no.
If you want to access to a business area first you must check if you have select and create session permission for the database tables. If so, is when you must check rights in Discoverer.
Alex.

Object owner shown as NULL in Folder Properties

Hi,
Has anyone else come across an EUL where, when you open the folder properties window, the Owner property is null? This seems to be consistent across all BA's and all folders within the EUL. The EUL seems to work fine, but I'm concerned that if I make any changes, this will no longer be the case!
EUL version is 4.1.14. Disco Admin is version 4.1.48.08.
Cheers and TIA.
David

I was thinking about this and, of course, at first look, it would be a screwup.
Basically, the owner identifies the schema if you're pointing to a view/table in the database.
So, I quickly created a folder in an EUL using NEW and not from a file in the database and lo and behold, it shows the owner as NULL - which makes sense as it's not based on a table / view as such.
Also, created a bogus custom folder but it doesn't even have the owner option in the properties.
So, what I'm wondering is, if you create a complex folder, etc. will it keep the owner as NULL? And if so, is it possible you're looking at custom folders and not folders based directly on a database view / table?
Just wonderin'
Russ

Discoverer 11g need oracle database 11g?

Hi,
I have discoverer 11g. i try to open EUL of 10g discoverer. normally it will ask to upgrade the EUL. But it throws TNS error.
Can anybody tell, Does discoverer 11g version need oracle Database 11g or it will work on 10g Database?
Thanks,
chelladurai

chelladurai wrote:
I have discoverer 11g. i try to open EUL of 10g discoverer. Are you talking about the Discoverer EUL (schema) or the hosting database server?
In the past Discoverer tools/clients and EUL had to be of the same version, and I expect this to be the same for "11g".
You can probably have the Discoverer 11g EUL in a 10.x Database, but not Discoverer Admin/Plus 11g working with a previous EUL version (except, perhaps, for upgrading the schema objects to correct version of EUL).
Check the documentation!

EUL5 compatibility with OracleApps11.5.7

Has anyone been able to have an EUL version 5 to work with the business views generated with the OracleApps 11.5.7 ??
Where can I find the differences between the version 4 and 5 ??

1. Aperture 3.4.5.
2. Buy an Aperture 3 package from a source such as Amazon or eBay, install it, and click here.
(109607)

Looking for Discoverer Admin 3.1.36 or later

Trying to install Oracle Discoverer 3i. At
one point it says I need Discoverer Admin Edition version 3.1.36 or later and EUL version 3.1.77. The one available at technet is 3.1.25
Where can I get these latest version ? Thanks a lot

Release 3.1.36 of the Administration Edition will be available for download in a few days. This version will replace 3.1.25.
Regards,
Oracle Discoverer Team http://technet.oracle.com/

EUL version 3.1.13 in a 4.1.x enviroment

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for