FPBW: Extract Open Items with a posting date in the future

Dear all,
I'm are currently searching for possibilities to extract Open Items with a posting date in the future from SAP IS-U 4.72 into SAP BW 3.5.
Currently I'm using the Business Content extractor 0FC_OP_01 together with the mass transaction FPBW in IS-U.
The problem I'm facing is within the mass transaction FPBW. I've have set the key date at 01.11.2007, but this job already runs for 52.000 seconds on the same database select-statement.
Does anybody know a possible solution to improve the performance of the statement below? (I pasted it from the process overview)
================================
SELECT
/*+
INDEX("DFKKOP" "DFKKOP~1" "DFKKOP^1" "DFKKOP____1" "DFKKOP____1__X" "DFKKOP_1")
"BETRH" , "BETRW" , "BUDAT" , "BUKRS" , "FAEDN" , "GPART" , "GSBER" , "INKPS" , "SPART" , "VKONT" ,
"WAERS" , "MAHNV" , "ABWBL" , "APPLK" , "AUGBD" , "AUGBL" , "AUGBT" , "AUGDT" , "AUGRD" , "AUGST" ,
"AUGWA" , "BLART" , "BLDAT" , "EMGPA" , "GRKEY" , "HVORG" , "MANSP" , "MWSKZ" , "OPBEL" , "OPSTA" ,
"OPUPK" , "PERSL" , "PYMET" , "QSSHB" , "SBETW" , "SPZAH" , "STUDT" , "TVORG" , "VTREF" , "XBLNR" ,
"XMANL" , "HKONT" , "OPUPZ" , "OPUPW" , "STAKZ" , "WHGRP" , "AUGBS" , "XANZA" , "XRAGL" , "ABWTP" ,
"ASTKZ"
FROM
"DFKKOP"
WHERE
"MANDT" = :A0 AND "AUGST" = :A1 AND "GPART" BETWEEN :A2 AND :A3 AND ( "AUGDT" = :A4 OR "AUGDT" > :A5
AND ( "BUDAT" <= :A6 OR "AUGBD" <= :A7 ) OR "WHGRP" <> :A8 AND "OPUPW" = :A9 )
ORDER BY
"AUGST" , "GPART"#
=================================
I have already tried to create an index on the following fields (in the same order):
- MANDT           Client
- AUGST           Clearing status
- GPART           Business Partner Number
- AUGDT           Clearing date
- BUDAT           Posting Date in the Document
Any help would be appreciated!
Thanks in advance,
Steven Groot

Hi Marcos,
When you have created the Restricted keyfigures for Open Items, You have to add the date characteristic on which you are looking open item and add the variable there.Here you have to use a variable of type Interval and select the operator "<" the date of the Variable.If you go through, there are standard variable for keydate, which you can use directly.
Hope you got the idea
Regards
Happy Tony

Similar Messages

How to make a single payment for different open items with same due date

Hi,
I have created a payment method and selected "Payment per due day " option in payment method company code settings.
Even I have selected that option, Payment will not happen grouping for the items with same due date
for ex : I have two open items with one due date and another open item with another due date so when I am trying performing F110 system should make a single payment for the item with same due date and seperate payment for another item.
But system making single payment for all items
Could you please suggest anything how to make a seperate payment with due date.
Regards
VK GUPTA

Hi,
Please check Vendor Master data: FK02 ->company code data -> Payment transaction accounting: unflag 'individual payment'.
Make a test and let me know if it's okay.
regards

Applicatons that are superseded with a deadline date in the future, kicks of before deadline date has been passed.

So how to explain this as best as possible....
First off, I have seen this "issue" since ConfigMgr 2012 RTM and I have seen it continuously through the various upgrades done on the way to ConfigMgr 2012 R2. The environment consists of a single AD domain, one ConfigMgr Primary site with 30 DP's
and 1500 computers.
Application B is created and it should supersede application A. The application is present on all computers throughout the environment. The application is distributed to all DP's. The deployment of application A is targeted to a collection containing all
computers. Then the deployment of application A is deleted. Application B is then configured to supersede application A with an uninstall of application A and the deployment type is replaced with the deployment type of application B. The option that Allows
users to see older deployment types is not selected. Now application B is deployed to the same collection as application A was. The deployment settings are configured with a deadline date in the future (to match the corporate maintenance window - not a ConfigMgr
maintenance window), but the application should be visible for users who want to upgrade before the deadline is reached. The option of automatically upgrading any superseded versions of the application is selected. The deployment is not created as a required
deployment, but only available.
What happens after the above is done is a bit odd. If I compare a application deployment that is superseded, to the Software Updates that normally have the same psychological effect on users (for anyone in IT this is common knowledge to be: Postpone and
don't bug me again until deadline has passed and then becomes a forced installation/update, for about 70% of the user mass) this is not the case. After about 24 hours about every single computer that is online has received the deployment of application B and
has been successfully installed. I refuse to believe that close to a 100% of the users actually select the option to upgrade application B before the deadline has been passed.
I have checked the above and it looks like it does not honor the deadline given and finds out that when it can kick of the deployment, it does.
This also happens if I don't delete the deployment of application A and leave it deployed to the same collection as the superseding application B is deployed to.
Any ideas on why I'm seeing this behavior would be greatly appriciated.
/Tom Erik

Well, it's an available deployment. The only thing that it should do is to upgrade the superseded application, if present on the computer and that is set to be performed several weeks in the future. In the particular example (log files) below, the deadline
is set to be on 1 April 2015 (!). All deployments are set to use client local time, when deployed to a computer collection. All other user (if I remember correct) deployments are set to use UTC, as client local time is not an option.
What I do see on a particular computer is that when no user was logged on, the deployment started the application installation. This is what I found in the AppEnforce.log (notice the time stamp around the 18th at 13:42):
+++ Starting Uninstall enforcement for App DT "Install Microsoft Office 2010 w/SP2 - x86 - Windows Installer (*.msi file)" ApplicationDeliveryType - ScopeId_5A0DA406-A98B-4302-9061-7A14FC9FCC1E/DeploymentType_7edd6b29-eb40-4019-a0c6-04da65e3407a, Revision - 4, ContentPath - C:\WINDOWS\ccmcache\o1, Execution Context - System AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:20 1164 (0x048C)
A user is not logged on to the system. AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:21 1164 (0x048C)
Performing detection of app deployment type Install Microsoft Office 2010 w/SP2 - x86 - Windows Installer (*.msi file)(ScopeId_5A0DA406-A98B-4302-9061-7A14FC9FCC1E/DeploymentType_7edd6b29-eb40-4019-a0c6-04da65e3407a, revision 4) for system. AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:21 1164 (0x048C)
+++ Discovered application [AppDT Id: ScopeId_5A0DA406-A98B-4302-9061-7A14FC9FCC1E/DeploymentType_7edd6b29-eb40-4019-a0c6-04da65e3407a, Revision: 4] AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:21 1164 (0x048C)
App enforcement environment:
Context: Machine
Command line: setup.exe /uninstall ProPlus /config uninstall_config.xml
Allow user interaction: No
UI mode: 0
User token: null
Session Id: 4294967295
Content path: C:\WINDOWS\ccmcache\o1
Working directory: AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:21 1164 (0x048C)
Prepared working directory: C:\WINDOWS\ccmcache\o1 AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:21 1164 (0x048C)
Prepared command line: "C:\WINDOWS\ccmcache\o1\setup.exe" /uninstall ProPlus /config uninstall_config.xml AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:22 1164 (0x048C)
Executing Command line: "C:\WINDOWS\ccmcache\o1\setup.exe" /uninstall ProPlus /config uninstall_config.xml with system context AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:22 1164 (0x048C)
Working directory C:\WINDOWS\ccmcache\o1 AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:22 1164 (0x048C)
Post install behavior is BasedOnExitCode AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:22 1164 (0x048C)
Waiting for process 5108 to finish. Timeout = 120 minutes. AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:42:22 1164 (0x048C)
Process 5108 terminated with exitcode: 3010 AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:51:27 1164 (0x048C)
Looking for exit code 3010 in exit codes table... AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:51:27 1164 (0x048C)
Matched exit code 3010 to a PendingSoftReboot entry in exit codes table. AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:51:27 1164 (0x048C)
++++++ App enforcement completed (547 seconds) for App DT "Install Microsoft Office 2010 w/SP2 - x86 - Windows Installer (*.msi file)" [ScopeId_5A0DA406-A98B-4302-9061-7A14FC9FCC1E/DeploymentType_7edd6b29-eb40-4019-a0c6-04da65e3407a], Revision: 4, User SID: ] ++++++ AppEnforce 18.02.2014 13:51:27 1164 (0x048C)
And this kind of corresponds with what I can see in the ServiceWindowManager.log (again, notice the timestamp at 13:42):
OnIsServiceWindowAvailable called with: Runtime:1, Type:6 ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 05:00:00 3924 (0x0F54)
Biggest Active Service Window for Type=6 not found ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 05:00:00 3924 (0x0F54)
Program cannot Run! Setting *canProgramRun to FALSE ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 05:00:00 3924 (0x0F54)
WillProgramRun called with: Runtime:1, Type:6 ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 05:00:00 3924 (0x0F54)
A Service Window of this type exists. ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 05:00:00 3924 (0x0F54)
There exists a Service Window of this Type, for this duration. The Program will run eventually. ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 05:00:00 3924 (0x0F54)
ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 05:00:00 3924 (0x0F54)
OnIsServiceWindowAvailable called with: Runtime:7200, Type:2 ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 13:42:17 5504 (0x1580)
No Restricting Service Windows exist. It can therefore run... ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 13:42:17 5504 (0x1580)
OnIsServiceWindowAvailable called with: Runtime:7200, Type:2 ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 13:42:19 3396 (0x0D44)
No Restricting Service Windows exist. It can therefore run... ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 13:42:19 3396 (0x0D44)
OnIsServiceWindowAvailable called with: Runtime:7200, Type:2 ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 13:51:27 5704 (0x1648)
No Restricting Service Windows exist. It can therefore run... ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 13:51:27 5704 (0x1648)
OnIsServiceWindowAvailable called with: Runtime:7200, Type:2 ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 13:51:28 756 (0x02F4)
No Restricting Service Windows exist. It can therefore run... ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 13:51:28 756 (0x02F4)
OnIsServiceWindowAvailable called with: Runtime:7200, Type:2 ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 14:03:52 5060 (0x13C4)
No Restricting Service Windows exist. It can therefore run... ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 14:03:52 5060 (0x13C4)
OnIsServiceWindowAvailable called with: Runtime:7200, Type:2 ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 14:03:52 6096 (0x17D0)
No Restricting Service Windows exist. It can therefore run... ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 14:03:52 6096 (0x17D0)
OnIsServiceWindowAvailable called with: Runtime:7200, Type:2 ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 14:04:12 4192 (0x1060)
No Restricting Service Windows exist. It can therefore run... ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 14:04:12 4192 (0x1060)
OnIsServiceWindowAvailable called with: Runtime:7200, Type:2 ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 14:04:14 5828 (0x16C4)
No Restricting Service Windows exist. It can therefore run... ServiceWindowManager 18.02.2014 14:04:14 5828 (0x16C4)
There are no maintenance windows configured in ConfigMgr at all for any collections.
/Tom Erik

BEX - Get Open Items with a key Date

Hi Gurus,
Im working with the Cube and ODS for AR Line items (0FIAR_C03- 0FIAR_O03) and i need to create a report that shows the Open items by Customer with a Key Date.
I did the query that shows all the open items by customer, and i want to know where can i put the filter to input a key date, and only shows the open items until that date.
Thanks in advanced, i really appreciate your help

Hi Marcos,
When you have created the Restricted keyfigures for Open Items, You have to add the date characteristic on which you are looking open item and add the variable there.Here you have to use a variable of type Interval and select the operator "<" the date of the Variable.If you go through, there are standard variable for keydate, which you can use directly.
Hope you got the idea
Regards
Happy Tony

Extracting Open Items : Problem with mass activity FPBW

Hi everybody,
I need to extract Open Items in BW. I use the extractor 0FC_OP_01 which extract the content of table DFKKOPBW in OLTP. Open Items are written in table DFKKOPBW by the mass activity FPBW.
I have a problem with this mass activity : the field "Business partner number" stay empty in table DFKKOPBW after the execution of FPBW, whereas it's not empty in table DFKKOP... (and for the cleared items it works...)
Does anybody have a solution for my problem?
Best regards
Aube

hi buddy,
go to SBIW go to the setting for application specificdatasourse in that go to contact account recivable, click the fileds for extrction add the field the data to see in to dffkopbw table after mass activity
regards
nag

2lis_02_scl extract records with wrong posting date for Good Receipts.

Hi Experts,
We are currently having issue of mismatch between BW Schedule Line data with R/3 values for the Goods Receipts posting date updating incorrectly in to BW.
Example.
In table EKBE purchase order history we have following records.
MANDT EBELN        EBELP   ZEKKN VGABE GJAHR BELNR      BUZEI BEWTP BWART BUDAT      MENGE
501   5600453404   00010   00    1     2010 5012473031 0001 E     101   23.01.2010        1.250,000
501   5600453404   00010   00    1     2010 5012473031 0002 E     101   23.01.2010        1.250,000
501   5600453404   00010   00    1     2010 5012473031 0003 E     101   23.01.2010        1.250,000
501   5600453404   00010   00    1     2010 5012693310 0001 E     101   26.02.2010        1.250,000
Which means we have on posting date of 23.01.2010 1250*3 i.e. 3750 quantity of Goods Receipts.
However when we check the extractor we get multiple records in internal table C_T_DATA and in psa.
Line BWV ETENR   SLFDT              MENGE    ROCA BEDAT                            BUDAT          EBELN
       ORG                                                        NCEL
1     001     0001     20100125     3750.000          20100113     ZNB     F     00000000     5600453404
2     001     0002     20100226     1250.000          20100113     ZNB     F     00000000     5600453404
3     002     0001     20100125     3750.000     X     20100113     ZNB     F     20100123     5600453404
4     002     0001     20100125     3750.000          20100113     ZNB     F     20100123     5600453404
5     003     0001     20100125     3750.000     X     20100113     ZNB     F     20100127     5600453404
6     003     0001     20100125     3750.000          20100113     ZNB     F     20100127     5600453404
7     002     0001     20100125     3750.000     X     20100113     ZNB     F     20100226     5600453404
8     002     0001     20100125     3750.000          20100113     ZNB     F     20100226     5600453404
9     002     0002     20100226     1250.000     X     20100113     ZNB     F     20100226     5600453404
As can be seen we have record no 8 for ETENR (Schedule line 1) with posting date 26.02.2010 and another record with posting date 23.01.2010.
Since we are getting 2 records the record with incorrect posting date overwrites the record with correct one.
Any idea if this could be a standard extractor problem or any other way to resolve this issue.
Any help would be appreciated.

First of all, are you using a staging DSO? (You should ideally)
If yes, is it a Write Optimized DSO? (Again, this is ideal)
If its a standard DSO, the values maybe over-writing upon activation.
You have 3 records (quantity = 1250 * 3) that have been receipted on 23.01.2010, where Posting Date = 23.01.2010.
You also have a record (quantity = 1250 * 1) that has been receipted on 26.01.2010. Posting date = 26.01.2010.
Now, in RSA3 & in PSA you can see more records than intended.
This is because you have before & after images. (ROCANCEL = X or blank).
ROCANCEL = X --> Before Image (record before change)
ROCANCEL = blank --> After Image (record after change)
This is a standard property of the extractor.
Now, we also have something known as BWVORG (Process Keys). Each process, i.e. creating a PO, Goods Receipt, Invoice etc.. have different Process Keys.
Creation - 001
Goods Rcpt. - 002
Invoice - 003
We can see that record 8, i.e. BWVORG = 002 (GR) has been modified on 26.01.2010.
That is why there is before image and after image.
Which one should be the correct posting date? 23.01.2010?
Normally in a Write optimized DSO, you will have all the records (before and after images & others as well).
I hope this helps.
Please let me know if otherwise.

S_ALR_87010007 (open items with foriegn customers)

While executing S_ALR_87010007 (open items with foriegn customers) i get the following error:
Call contained error(s): ADS (2)
This is happening after we have upgraded to ECC 6
Can anyone tell me what is the reason for this error? How do we rectify this?
Thanks and Regards,
Satya

Do we need to install ADS for this? We are able to execute this report in 4.7 version but not in ECC 6

Standard report(for open PO order items) with estimated Delivery dates

hi friends
i would like to know if there is any standard report(for open PO order items) with estimated Delivery dates on it.
thanks
alahari

ME2M (by material)
ME2L (by vendor)
ME2N (by number)
Use selection parameter WE101 for open GR
and scope of list EINT (scheduling lines)

Possible to clear vendor open item against already posted payment document?

Hi
Can you advise if it is possible to clear an open item against already posted payment/clearing doc? Here is the background to the scenario:
An invoice was posted with transaction FB60. This was subsequently picked up in the payment run F110 and cleared by payment document number 200005678. The item went to the bank on the paymnet file and was paid out to the vendor. The transaction reference, which appeared on the incoming bank statemnet was the payment document number 200005678.
Subsequently it was discovered that the original invoice should have been posted with reference to a PO using MIRO. The requirement now is to reverse the paymnet documnet 200005678 in SAP, then reverse the document that was posted using FB60. After this the invoice will be posted using MIRO. This will create an open item on the vendor account.
This item will not be piad out again. Therefore the requirement is to try clear that open item against the previously posted payment document 200005678.
Is there any way to clear this vendor open item against the originally posted payment document 200005678?? Or any other advice on how this scenario can be handled in SAP?
Thank for your help.
Mike

Hi,
I tried that option in our test system. I ran FBRA and entered Paymnet Documnet Number (+Clearing Doc Number), Company Code, Fiscal Year.
Then chose menu option Clearing -> Reset Cleared Items.
The system pops up a window asking for a reversal reason and reversal date. I use 01 and posting date of today.
The system now posts another cleared document. That document places the invoice as an open item on the vendor account. It does not place the Payment Document as an open item on the account.
When I go to F-44 only the open vendor invoice is showing there. There is no open paymnet document.
Is there perhaps some configuration setting that stops the placement of the paymnet document as an open item when reset?
Thanks for your help again.

Issue with the Posting Date of the Purchase Order.

Hi All,
There are fields in BW like SSL1: Time OK, SSL2: Qty OK, SSL3: Time & Qty Ok, SSL4: Days Late (Routines are written to calculate). These fields will indicate whether the delivery against a GR is OK or not with respect to Time, Quantity and the No. of Days..
But here the issue I am facing is
If there is only1 delivery/ GR against a single item the calculation in BW are correct - i.e. for a particular PO if there is only one delivery the above fields like SSL1: Time Ok, SSL2: Qty OK will show like the delivery is done within the specified time and everything is OK (in case if it is delivered within the allotted time)
But if there are multiple deliveries or multiple GR's posted for one PO item, the calculations are going wrong i.e. even if the delivery is done well within the specified time it is showing the wrong calculations like it is delievered too late. Because in this case the earlier dates are overwritten.
Can anyone throw me some light on how can I go about solving this issue.
I am thinking of declaring the Posting Date as the KeyField of the DSO as of now it is a Data field I also want to know the impact of assigning this as a Keyfield.
Thanks in advance,
Prasapbi

Hi,
As I understand, you have a DSO based on Purchase Order and your key field is PO and its line item. The problem as you stated will always be there if you have multiple deliveries/GRs created for a single line item because the system will overwrite the entries for same key.
Problem with adding Posting date as keyfield will be that then your key will be PO-PO Lineitem-Date. When PO will be created, the Posting date will be blank(correct me here if I am wrong), therefore you will have one entry for same PO-line item combination. One without date and other with date, which again would be incorrect. If my assumption about Posting date was wrong, even then your data may not be correct because then you may have many entries with same posting date which again would overwrite each other.
If there is any direct link between PO line item and number of deliveries that will get created for them, then you can bring that field in DSO as keyfield. But I don't think there is any such field.
Looking at your report requirement, I would suggest that you make a DSO based on Goods Receipts and then calculate these keyfigures by comparing the dates between GR posting date and PO line item date.
Else you can change the way your datasource works(if its generic one based on function module). Since your main requirement is to check whether the GR posting date has met your SLA or not, you should fetch all the details only when GR is created and make your key field as PO-PO Line item-GR

Charge off difference whening clearing customer open item with bank receipt

Hi,
Our company users will use F-32 to clear customer open item with bank receipt, sometimes, our invoice is 100 RMB issue to customer, the customer finally pay 99.98, then in F-32, we use charge off difference to post 0.02 difference to a account.
The user then want to control this, saying for example, if the customer pay only 90, whening using charge off differnce, the system will pop up a error message.
Can this be done in SAP, or we need to use user exit, then which user exit?
Thanks.

Dear,
This is done through customer tolerance group using transaction OBA3. Here enter the maximum amount in Loss under the Permitted Payment Differences. you are able to hold tolerance for customer clearing.
Is this what you wanted?
Regards,
Chintan Joshi.

Clearing forex open item with INR receipt

Hi,
We have a scenario were original customer invoice is in foreign currency. However, the money remitted by the customer is directly credited in the bank, not in the same foreign currency, but in Indian currency. In this case, the system is able to clear if we manually enter the forex gain or loss. But this gain or loss is calculated with reference to the current exchange rate and not with exchange rate as at the invoice posting.
Any idea how this could be handled?
Thanks
Muru

Lawrence,
The issue came because the user was trying to clear a Forex open item with local currency. In F-28, he was entering the local currency amount as receipt. The rate at which the receipt is converted is different from the rate maintained for forex valuation (M rate).
If the receipt is posted in the original document currency, the complication is avoided. However, I would be interested to know if you are aware of some other way of handling this.
Thanks
Muru

Payment run - should not clear the open item but should post payment doc

Hi Gurus,
Can you please help me , on how to acheive like when payment run F110 post the payment doc it should not close the open item rather keep that open item as open item , but hsould be be paid by payment doc posted through payment run F110.
Have any one of you had similar requirement ..? FICO gurus help me to acheiev this .. any exit /BADI ..or ideas..
Appreciate your help in advance

HI ,
Thanks for your reply , but still I am not clear on that.
reason they want to keep this open to be kept as open item , so that item will be picked up by dunning run ..
Basically the open invoice is being cleared by payment doc which was generated by payment run. If we look at BSEG in the open item record BSEG-AUGBL = will have the clearing doc number , and in addition to that BSEG will have created another record for the clearing doc as well .
May be since open invoice record is being updated with clearing doc (AUGBL ) , I belive its not shown up as open item .
Somehow this item should be kept as open item ... that is the req and also paid item payment reference should be transfered to Bill of exchange as well.
Hope you have clear background of my req...
Tnanks in advance ,

Function module for GL account open items at a key date

Is there a function module for "GL account open items at a key date" similar to following for customer and vendor accounts?
BAPI_AR_ACC_GETOPENITEMS Customer account open items at a key date
BAPI_AP_ACC_GETOPENITEMS Vendor account open items at a key date
If not, please suggest any alternatives. I am looking to capture the output of FBL3N (GL account line item display) in a program.
Thank you in advance.
Prasanna Pujari

hi,
please go through the below link i think it will help u.
http://sapfunctional.com/FI/GL/Balance.
Regard
Abhishek Tripathi

Why open items with dunning level 0 sometimes appear?

Hi All,
when I run the dun transaction (F150) sometimes in table MHND and MHNK open items with dunning level 0 appear. These are open items overdue, but not enough to level 1. Note that this problem appear only sometimes.
Do you know how to avoid this?
Many thanks

Check if deselcting the indicator for Always Dun? in dunning level configuration in FBMP ,solves your issue.
Thanks and regards
Kedar

FPBW: Extract Open Items with a posting date in the future

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for