FMS IN ROW LEVEL

Hi All
Working on SAP 2007B PL17
I reuired Foreign name filled from the item master to appear in the Row level of the Purchase order.
I am using below querry but not getting the result
SELECT $[oitm.frgnname]
Please Suggest
Ashish Gupte

Hi Pankaj ,
I am getting following error when i had run your Querry
[Microsoft][SQL Native Client][SQL Server]Cannot convert a char value to money. The char value has incorrect syntax.
'Service Contracts' (OCTR)
Ashish Gupte

Similar Messages

FMS on row level

Hello
I have created a FMS on row level for sales documents
The FMS is simple based on the old material number which will trigger the new item number on Item code
But when the FMS is triggered the old number field becomes blank and the item code is fullfiled
But when you copy to another sales doc (from SO to BN) the issue is that as there is no old item code the FMS changes the item code blank...
the definition of the FMS is Autorefresh flagged
Display saved value
Any idea how to keep the old number once it is keyed in

I tested this and the issue is because when you add an ItemCode the system basically populates the quantity, price, etc and the other columns get blanked.
This is why the user field on the row level is getting blanked.
This is what I would recommend.
Make the formatted search on the ItemCode to accept this old number through a parameter instead of the U_ZANC user field.
FMS on ItemCode field
SELECT DISTINCT T0.ItemCode FROM [dbo\].[OITM\] T0
WHERE T0.U_MATCH = '[%0\]'
FMS on U_ZANC Column
SELECT DISTINCT T0.U_Match FROM [dbo\].[OITM\] T0
WHERE T0.ItemCode = $\[$38.1.0]
Let the user press Shift+F2 and enter the U_Match instead of on the User Field. Once the ItemCode is populated the FMS on the U_ZANC will fire
Regards
Suda

FMS required for Row Level in Marketing document for Dimensions vs BP

Dear All,
I need some help in regards to the FMS in SAP Business One. I am trying to use Dimension in the row level of my marketing document. In Dimension 2 and Dimension 3 I have named them as Dimension 2 whose description is Regions and in Dimension 3 whose descrption is Area.
Now in Cost Accounting I have setup the Profit Centers in Dimension 2 Region as under :
Factor Code Factor Description
CD0201         Region 1_Asia
CD0202         Region 2_Middle East
Also I have setup the Profit Centers in Dimension 3 Area as under :
Factor Code   Factor Description
CD0201A       India
CD0201B       Pakistan
CD0201C       China
CD0202A       Syria
CD0202B       Saudi Arabia
I have created a udf in the Business Partner Header as U_DCostRegion wherein I have set Valid Values for Field as under which the user will put
Value            Description
CD0201         Region 1_Asia
CD0202         Region 2_Middle East
In the Business Business Partner Territory the BP has been defined as per the Dimension 3 Area. In which for e.g C0001 territory is India, C0002 territory is Pakistan and so on
Now my requirement :
I want that if the user is doing a Sales Quotation or Sales Order from the Sales Quotation then in the Row level Dimensions column of Regions and Area automatically through FMS it should populate the data accordingly as to what is put in the BP master Data. For Example user is doing Sales Quotation for C0001 whose Area ( U_DCostRegion) is set as CD0201 Region 1_Asia and Territory is set as India then automatically in the Sales Quotation row columns of Region and Area values of CD0201 Region 1_Asia and CD0201A India should come.
I think this requirement can be fullfilled by FMS but I am not able to do it from my end. Please advise what should be the FMS for it.
Regards,
Depika

Dear Rahul,
I am able to put the Region from the Business Partner UDF to the document Row of Region column with the FMS as SELECT $[OCRD.U_DCostRegion] as in the U_DCostRegion I had set Valid Values for Field as
Value    Description
CD0201 Region 1_Asia
CD0202 Region 2_Middle East
As in the Dimension in Marketing document it takes the Factor Code e.g CD0201 so I am able to handle it with the above FMS.
But for the Area dimension I am not able to make the FMS because in the marketing document it takes the Factor Code means the Factor Code e.g CD0201A and its not linked to the BP Territory Table of OTER.
I want a FMS which is linked with the OTER Table also as such if in the BP the territory ( avaliable in base product BP > General Tab > Territory ( where its defined as India for BP C0001) should link to CD0201A which is the Factor Code wherein the Factor Description is India.
please advise in this regard.
Regards,
depika

Fms to reduce 2% discount from Row level Outgoing Payment

hi experts,
one of my client will make payment to the vendor with 2% deduction from the total payment if we select an invoice in row level 2% should be deducted from the invoice and the 2% amount should display in cash discount column how to write an FMS query for this Scenario
Thanks
Meghanath

Hi,
Please refer below scree shot before and after executing FMS:
Thanks & Regards,
Nagarajan

FMS On Header Level UDF

Hi Experts.
I want to set up approval procedure based on the sales warehouse.
Sales Employee1 is only allowed to sell from WHS1. If the sales employee has to sell from a different warehouse, an approval has to be triggered. I want a header level UDF the gets the Warehouse selected on the Invoice. If WHS2 is selected the UDF is updated and the approval procedure triggered.
Please help
Regards.

In a header level FMS you can not access the row level data. (Only the first line.) So you can not move the warehouse code automatically to the header UDF. But you can force the user set a header level UDF to sign that this is a critical transaction. This can be done writing some code into the SBO_SP_TransactionNotification stored procedure.
1. Create a header level UDF e.g. named ForApproval with possible values Y and N, with default value N.
2. Write code in the SBO_SP_TransactionNotification stored procedure, that signals an error message u2018You should set ForApproval to Y!u2019 if U_ForApproval=u2019Nu2019, the originating user is not allowed to make transaction from this warehouse and there is any line from this warehouse.
3. Set an approval procedure according to the header level ForApproval field. The user approving the document can add then the transaction.
(To force setting the ForApprova flag insert the code in your SBO_SP_TransactionNotification stored procedure after the line
-- ADD YOUR CODE HERE )

Auto fill Row level UDF from Header Level UDF

Hi,
I have a header UDF (U_BU) and Row UDF (U_BU).
Each time I add a row (item or service type) I want the row UDF to be loaded with the header UDF data, using a formatted search on the row UDF.
I also want the user to be able to change the ROW UDF if it is not meant to be the same as the header.
Could someone help on this?
Kind Regards,
Eric

Hi Eric,
Try this,
->> Assign this FMS in UDF(row level) on A/R Invoice.
->> Auto Refresh of Item Description.
SELECT $[OINV.U_BU]
or
for example, use variable
(because this method of FMS will work all marketing doc.)
SELECT $[$33.0.U_BU]
->> Assign the FMS in UDF on item rows.
1. Goto the UDF and Click ShiftAltF2.
2. Select the SEARCH BY SAVED QUERY.
3. Assign the FMS Query.
4. Select the AUTO REFRESH WHEN FIELD CHENGES.
5. Select Item Description.
6. Check the Display Saved Values.
Regards,
Madhan.

Approval on Row Level

Hi All,
I like to set approval on rows where Unit Price is Greater then U_MRP approval should goes to concern heads.
Is is possible to set approval on Row Level.
I am using SBO 2005 B, PL 38
Warm Regards,
Chintesh Soni

Hi,
There is a pdf file relate to approval procedure query that could be used to create approval procedure on the row level. You could also try to browse this link:
http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/sap/kehinde/archives/approval-procedures-line-level-and-header-level-part-1-9662
I also try to find the pdf file about it and if I find it I will let you know
I suggest you to try to create UDF and Query FMS where the UDF is the result of the deviation between unit price and U_MRP. E.g. Dev_UP. Dev_UP = Unitprice - U_MRP
The query FMS could be like this :
$[$38.14.0] - $[$38.U_MRP.0]
Assign the query FMS, to the U_Dev_UP and then create a query approval procedure for the U_Dev_UP where the query should state that U_Dev_UP must be as same as zero if not that it should ask approval request. Let me know if you need more detail. Or just mail me.
Rgds,
[email protected]

Row Level Locking while inserting a record.

It is a good practice to lock the whole table or do the row level locking while performing any DELETE / UPDATE / MODIFY actions on a database table. Is it necessary to do the same thing while inserting a record via INSERT statement?
One point may arise if two users are inserting same records at a same time....
Well i am little bit confused here bcos if a record doen't exist in a table what is the point of locking it.
Please help me.

create a lock object using SE11 for that perticular table and include field names in Lock parameters. Then it will generate two FMs one for locking and another for unlocking.
Call the lock FM before updating the table and pass that row key value(For fields which taken in lock parameters for creating lock objects) to the exporting parameters.
Then do the updation.
Reward if useful...................

Row Level Security not working for SAP R/3

Hi Guys
We have an environment where the details are as mentioned below:
1. Crystal Reports are created using Open SQL driver to extract data from SAP R/3 using the SAP Integration Kit.
2. The SAP roles are imported in Business Objects CMC.
3. Crystal Reports are published on the Enterprise as well.
3. Authorization objects are created in SAP R/3 and added as required for the row level security as mentioned in the SAP Installation guide as well. The aim is when the user logs into the Infoview and refreshes the report he should only see data that he is meant to so through the authorization objects.The data security works very much fine when the reports are designed directly on the table but when the reports are built on the Business View it doesnt work hence the user is able to see all data.
Any help in this issue is greatly appreciated.
Thanks and Regards
Kamal

Hi,
In order for row level security to work for you using the OpenSql driver, you need to configure the Security Definition Editor on your SAP server. This is a server side tool which the Integration solution for SAP offers as a transport.
This tool defined which tables are to be restricted based on authorizations.
However since you are seeing the issue on reports based on Business Views, you need to identify whether the Business View is configured in such a way where the user refreshing the report is based on the user logging into Infoview. If the connection to your SAP server is always established with the same user when BV is used then you security definition is pointless.
You can confirm this by tracing your SAP server to identify what user is being used to logon to SAP to refresh the reports.
thanks
Mike

Pl sql row level locking with wait ?

Hi,
I am using oracle 10g.
I am new to Oracle locks. I have two tables Table1(id_no, employee, salary) and Table2(id_no, employee, salary).
I need to pull any requested row from Table1 into Table2 only once on demand. I have a procedure to pull data and there could be more than one requests try to call same procedure to pull a row from Table1 into Table2 at any given time.
I coded below to achieve row level lock. if one transaction gets row level lock on Table1 at 2, so other Transactions should wait till the lock is released at line 2 or 5 to avoid duplicates.
But below code is not working, I am getting duplicates when I call this using two concurrent java threads.
How do I control this concurrency issue so that I can avoid duplicate entries in Table2. Could any one please help?
1.begin
2.select 0 into emp_cnt
3.from Table1 where id=id_no
4.for update;
5.update Table1 set employee='xyz'
6.where id=id_no;
7.select count(*) into table2_cnt from Table2 where id=id_no;
8.if(table2_cnt =0) then
9.code to insert above row from Table1 to Table2;
10.end if;
11.commit;
12.End;
Edited by: 980916 on Jan 9, 2013 5:48 PM

Welcome to the forums and welcome to Oracle.
Lets establish one thing right from the beginning ... the Oracle Database is not a Microsoft product.
There is no general reason to use row level locks, you should not want to use row level locks, you don't need row level locks, and you will almost never have any valid reason to consider row level locks.
That said there are two situations were it may be necessary to lock a row prior to an update or delete (possibly in a merge) and in those cases you want to use the built-in SELECT FOR UPDATE syntax. (Demo here: http://www.morganslibrary.org/reference/deadlocks.html#dlfu). But we should be clear here ... one rarely needs to use this locking mechanism as the chances of a collision in a well designed application are essentially zero.
Also as you are new to Oracle please explore the dynamic performance view V$RESERVED_WORDS and do not name objects, columns, etc. with reserved word names not that there is an excuse in any product to name a column "ID." Something Joe Celko has railed about for decades and a tradition I think we should all follow.
In the case of your posted code example (btw please read the FAQ and learn how to use tags) the solution is SELECT FOR UPDATE if locking can be justified which is unlikely.
Edited by: damorgan on Jan 9, 2013 6:11 PM

How to get a row level share lock

Is it possible to acquire a row-level share lock, which would do all of the following?
1. Prevent others from updating that row.
2. Allow others to read that row.
3. Allow others to update other rows in the same table.
I have the following scenario where two transactions need to lock eachother out:
Set-up:
Insert into TABLE_A(value_a) values ('ok');
Insert into TABLE_B(value_b) values ('ok');
Transaction A:
Select value_b from TABLE_B
If value_b = 'ok', update TABLE_A set value_a = 'not ok'
Transaction B:
Select value_a from TABLE_A
If value_a = 'ok', update TABLE_B set value_b = 'not ok'
If transaction A runs first then the end result is "not ok" only in TABLE_A.
If transaction B runs first then the end result is "not ok" only in TABLE_B.
If the two transactions run concurrently, it is possible to get "not ok" in both tables. This is what I would like to prevent.
One way to get what I want is to use "select for update":
Transaction A:
Select value_a from TABLE_A for update
Select value_b from TABLE_B for update
If value_b = 'ok', update TABLE_A set value_a = 'not ok'
Transaction B:
Select value_a from TABLE_A for update
Select value_b from TABLE_B for update
If value_b = 'ok', update TABLE_B set value_a = 'not ok'
This way both transactions won't perform their update unless they know that the result if their select will still be the same after they commit. However, by using "select for update" Transaction A has gained an exclusive lock on the TABLE_B row. If a Transaction C with the same contents as Transaction A happens concurrently, then the two will block eachother even though all they both want is to read data from the same table.
Another way is to use "lock table", however using that would block out not only writes to a specific row, but writes to all rows in the table. (In my example there is only one row, but obviously that's just a simplified example.)
I have looked at the "serializable" isolation level, but that doesn't seem to help because the queries and updates involve more than one table.
I know that "reads don't block writes" is a fundamental part of the Oracle design that makes Oracle what it is, but is there any way I can explicitly make it happen anyway? Or can anyone see some other solution to what I'm trying to achieve?

Let me give a more real-world example to show what I'm talking about.
Imagine a simple bug-reporting OLTP application. Each bug has 3 fields:
1. Description
2. Resolution
3. Status (open/closed)
The application also has some rules:
A. If the Status is "closed", Description and Resolution cannot be changed.
B. In order to change the Status to "closed", both a Description and Resolution must be specified.
Now as long as only one person at a time updates a bug, everything is fine. However, if one person switches the Status to "closed" while another concurrently blanks out the Resolution you end up with a closed bug that has no Resolution. This is why some locking is necessary.
If Description, Resolution, and Status are all stored in the same table row, then it makes sense for each transaction to simply select the whole row FOR UPDATE, and then UPDATE it after it ensures all the rules are passed. However, in my fictional bug-reporting application they are all stored in separate tables. Now, the transaction that is making the change to Resolution could lock the row in the Status table FOR UPDATE (as everyone so far has suggested). Transactions making a similar change to the Description should then also lock the row in the Status table FOR UPDATE for the same reason. The end result of this is that Description changes and Resolution changes lock eachother out (can't happen concurrently, are serialized) when they don't need to be. Description changes and Resolution changes don't affect eachother, but because they both need to (exclusively) lock the same row, they are serialized.
If there was a way to acquire a share lock on the row in the Status table, then Description and Resolution changes would use that and not affect eachother. Status changes would still acquire an exclusive lock on the row, and would be blocked by (and block any further) concurrent Description and Resolution changes. This would be ideal.

Row level locks

Hi All,
Version - Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.2.0
I have a card's data in a table. Whenver a two different sessions/threads selects the data sometimes they get the same card.
Now I need to lock the record. If Thred-1 selects then it will lock the first records and thread-2 must select the second record as the first record is locked by thread-1.
I have written a piece of code , at first session it locks one record and when second session select it selects no records.
I have takem MIN group function because I want the cards to be selected in order.
Can you please tell where is my code went wrong or need some changes. Data and code is given below.
SQL> SELECT * FROM crm_pps_cards_sz ORDER BY 1;
CARD_NO          PIN SERIAL_NUMBER DATE_CREATED DATE_MERGED DATE_ALLOCATED DATE_REGISTERED
6338079966430591 9985 9950013661    12/06/2011
6338079973369543 6858 9950013660    12/06/2011
6338079978994154 7144 9950013655    12/06/2011
6338079981471778 7631 9950013654    12/06/2011
6338079986365041 7849 9950013657    12/06/2011
SQL>
Thread - 1
Connected to Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.2.0
Connected as crm
SQL> set serveroutput on
SQL>
SQL> DECLARE
2    l_rec crm_pps_cards_sz%ROWTYPE;
3    CURSOR c IS
4      SELECT * FROM crm_pps_cards_sz t WHERE t.card_no =
5      (SELECT MIN(card_no) card FROM crm_pps_cards_sz)
6      FOR UPDATE NOWAIT SKIP LOCKED;
7
8 BEGIN
9    OPEN c;
10    FETCH c
11      INTO l_rec;
12    CLOSE c;
13    dbms_output.put_line('Card Allocated ' || l_rec.card_no);
14
15 END;
16 /
Card Allocated 6338079966430591
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed
SQL>
Thread - 2
Connected to Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.2.0
Connected as crm
SQL> set serveroutput on
SQL>
SQL> DECLARE
2    l_rec crm_pps_cards_sz%ROWTYPE;
3    CURSOR c IS
4      SELECT * FROM crm_pps_cards_sz t WHERE t.card_no =
5      (SELECT MIN(card_no) card FROM crm_pps_cards_sz)
6      FOR UPDATE NOWAIT SKIP LOCKED;
7
8 BEGIN
9    OPEN c;
10    FETCH c
11      INTO l_rec;
12    CLOSE c;
13    dbms_output.put_line('Card Allocated ' || l_rec.card_no);
14
15 END;
16 /
Card Allocated
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed
SQL> My concern is that it must allocate in the order
6338079966430591
6338079973369543
....

It is because MIN(ard_no) is able to find value from table which is locked by you thread 1 and thread 1 mentioned NOWAIT thus it thread 2 went out without getting anything.
Please check my reply to your duplicate thread "row level locking" .

Row Level Restrictions on DeskI Report not working under InfoView

When running/refreshing DesktopIntelligence XI r3 (Full Client) reports under InfoView, the row-level restrictions applied in the universe are not being included in the SQL (additional filtering is NOT happening). However, if a user creates a report using the same universe in WebIntelligence or if the user runs the same report in DesktopIntelligence, the row-level restrictions are working.
It strikes me that the problem has to do with security rights granted (or not granted), but I can't figure out which settings would allow the proper running of a DeskI report under InfoView.
Thanks for any assistance rendered!

Mike,
Do people connect to Infoview and Deski using the same authentication method and the same username?
How does this compare to how your data restrictions are configured?
Are you using @Variable('BOUSER') restrictions? Have you taken domain into account e.g. "Domain\UserName" vs "UserName"?

Relationship between header and row level data.

Hi all
I need to know how to relate a field in the header level and the row level...
On my row level i want the route id to be related to the route name field at the header level...instead of showing this route id it must show only the header so...based on the row level data the header must change...
I tried insertin the field but when i do a relate to on either fields its showing me only fields on that catagory ( Header only or Row Level only)
Thanks

The Header is evaluated and printed first and then only Repetitive area is computed and printed. You cannot try to arrive header based on the Repetitive area.
Please explain in detail which screen etc.. so that we can suggest some work arounds

SBO - Approval Procedures at row level

Does anyone know how to create an approval procedure that is triggered by a row field. For example if I want an approval procedure that verifies discount percentage in row level.
There must be a workaround, cause I know this is not a functionality in SBO.
Thanks,
Hernán Baudrit

The way you could solve this is to create a UDF at Header level and link a formatted search which loops through the number of rows in the transaction and returns TRUE if for example the Discount % is greater than allowed.
The coding should be something as follows:
Declare @Counter as integer
Set @Couter = 0
Declare @TempTable TABLE (STAT varchar(50)) -- Temporary table holding results of loop
Declare @LoopFor as integer
Set @LoopFor = (select (*) from (select T1.DocEntry
                                                          from INV1 T0 join OINV T1 on T0.DocEntry = T1.DocEntry
                                                                  where T0.DocNum = $[OINV.DocNum])
While @Counter < @LoopFor
BEGIN
      Declare @Disc as integer
       Set @Disc = ( select T1.DiscPrcnt
                                        from INV1 T0 join OINV T1 on T0.DocEntry = T1.DocEntry
                                                   where T0.DocNum = $[OINV.DocNum]) and T1.LineNum = @Counter
     IF @Disc > 20
     BEGIN
              INSERT @TempTable VALUES ('TRUE')
     END ELSE INSERT @TempTable VALUES ('FALSE')
@Counter = @Counter + 1
END
SELECT Distinct 'TRUE' from @TempTable where STAT = 'TRUE'
Please note that the coding is not 100% accurate but should give you an idea of how to work around the problem.
Next you should write a simple validation query on the value of the UDF to check whether it is set to 'True'.
I hope this helps.

FMS IN ROW LEVEL

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for