Inconsistency between single items & totals in FM ledger

Dear experts,
in productive environment we have the issue, that the totals of Commited Budget is not equal to the single items of Commited Budget. It seems, everytime a purchase requisition is simulated the amount will be added to the Commited Budget ledger in Funds Management, even if there is no purchase requisition saved for it.
Do you know any programms that might help to remove the inconsistencies from the ledger? Do you have any further ideas what to do?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks a lot,
Thomas

Hello Thomas,
Please have a look at note 189761 which mentions the reconstruction tools.
However, if after fixing old documents new inconsistencies appear, the cause should be analyzed.
I may suggest you to check whether or not report RGZZGLUX has been executed at any time in your system. If not, you should review note 977016, and then run RGZZGLUX , RFFMRC04 and FMBV (if you are using Former Budgeting) or FMAVCREINIT (if you are using BCS).
please take note that no budgeting / posting activities must take place when these reports are running, this also applies to background jobs.
If after all the above procedure you still find new inconsistencies, I would suggest you to open an OSS ticket for SAP to investigate.
Kind regards
Mar

Similar Messages

Difference between cumulative balance and line items total in FS10N

hi,
when I am executing FS10n, I observed that the cumulative balance amount is not equal to line items total . This is due to some amounts in previous years are varying from the line ltem totals in those periods of previous years.
This is not happening with QA server only Prdn server is facing this problem. Can anybody provide me a way to solve this..!?
Regards,
AJo
I have checked the master data for the GL and the check box for line item display is selected. It has not been changed for years.
Edited by: Anil Jonnalagadda on Oct 22, 2008 10:57 AM

Hi Anil,
The reason for the differences that you are viewing can be various. As the differences are found in the cummulative balance then it means that the differences might have occurred in previous fiscal years. The first stetp is to find when these differences were originated: You can run report SAPF190 (in se38) for previous fiscal years, and company code in question- This report should show the differences with message "Errors" in the log. If differences are found then you have to creeate a message and send it to SAP for further analysis and corrections.(only SAP experts can do this kind of corrections - component FI-GL-GL-X)
Also bear in mind that if you did archiving in previous fiscal years then this would not be an error:
If you already did archiving and secondary index deletion on this accounts with SAPF048I. So this explains why line items balance and GL summary balance differ ! There is no programm error.
See consulting note 81489 which describes this issue:
The balance of an account results from the balance of the open items. In
connection with an archiving that has been carried out, the line item
display - used with cleared items - must not therefore be interpreted as
a balance display. For the balance display, there are separate
correspond to the display balance of the open items from the line item
display.
Having archived and deleted secondary indexes ( with SAPF048I )
for an account you can not use line item drill down as a balance
display any more for a line item managed account.
( as not all line items are existing any more in table BSIS ! )
The transactions meant to display the binding balances are FS10N,
FK10N and FD10N.
They also give you the line items details, but only of those line
items not yet deleted ( by SAPF048I ).
kind regards,
Oscar Diaz

FS10N balance not tie with FBl3N line item totals

Hi
I searched the forum for posting on FS10N and FBL3N incorrect balances and I did not any post appropriate for my issue. Hence I am posting my issue here.
For a particular month, say 072010, FS10N GL balance does not tie with FBL3N line item totals. I am not sure why. In our case, we did not archive any line items and this is not related to year end carry forward. Year beginning GL balances look fine. We dont have any negative postings. Only few GL balances are off. We are using 4.7 version.
Do you know why this inconsistency and how to rectify it? Is there any program which I run apart from Yead End carry forward?
any ideas really appreciated.
Thanks

Hello
We have already this trouble.
To correct it you need to proceed like this (when NewGL is not activate, with new Gl there is one new programm)
Without newGL
- Block account to be posted (transaction FS00 Block for posting in the company view)
- Delete open item, by using the programm RFSEPA03 (you need to adapt it by a copy because if you don't you can't run it), also this programm will unflag your account in the company view
- Delete line item by the standrd program RFSEPA04
- Create the line item by the standard program RFSEPA01
- if this account is managed by open item, run the programm RFSEPA02 (you need to do the same adjustement of the RFSEPA03)
With NewGL, there is something new. the program RFSEPA02 is linked with a new transaction and you don't have to adjust it FAGL_ACTIVATE_OP. The difference is when you create the open item, you have to define the default profit center and default value depending of the customizing of the leading ledger.
BBest regards
Philippe,
Thanks for the rewards.

Inconsistency between catalog authoring tool & Search engine

Hi,
We are on CCM2.0 and SRM5.0 with catalog deployment in the same client as SRM.
In our implementation we are using master catalog and product catalog. We have very recently deleted around 65 items from our product catalog which is mapped to mater catalog and hence those 65 items are not found anymore in master catalog in CAT (Catalog authoring tool).
This master catalog when published, we expect that these 65 products should not be available for end users.
But end users can still see the deleted items through CSE (Catalog search engine). Thus there is data inconsistency between CAT & CSE.
Has anyone faced similar issue before if yes can you please share the same with us.
Edited by: Manoj Surve on Mar 24, 2009 7:05 AM

Run TCODE SE38 program /CCM/CLEANUP_MAPPING to look for errors/orphaned records in test mode.
If you want to clear out orphaned records uncheck the Test Mode but:
Warning: This program can slow down a production system as it clears out the memory buffers for user catalog searches and these have to be built up again by the users doing searches. This can be hours to days depending upon the size of your system and the number of users.
In Dev or UAt no problem.
Hope this helps?
Regards
Allen

Inconsistency between get-childitem -include and -exclude parameters

Hi,
Powershell 2.0
Does anyone else consider this a minor design bug in the Get-ChildItem command?
# create dummy files
"a","b","c" | % {$null | out-file "c:\temp\$_.txt"}
# this "fails", returns nothing
get-childitem c:\temp -include a*,b*
# this "works", returns desired files
get-childitem c:\temp\* -include a*,b*
# this "works", excludes undesired files
get-childitem c:\temp -exclude a*,b*
# this "fails", excludes undesired files BUT RECURSES sub-directories
get-childitem c:\temp\* -exclude a*,b*
I'm writing a wrapper script around the GCI cmdlet, but the inconsistency between the two parameters is problematic. My end user will surely just type a path for the path parameter, then wonder why -include returned nothing. I can't unconditionally
add an asterisk to the path parameter, since that messes up the exclude output.
I'm just wondering why Microsoft didn't make the parameter interaction consistent???
# includes desired files in the specified path
get-childitem -path c:\temp -include a*,b*
# excludes undesired files in the specified path
get-childitem -path c:\temp -exclude a*,b*
# combine both options
get-childitem -path c:\temp -include a*,b* -exclude *.log,*.tmp
# same as above, the asterisk doesn't matter
get-childitem -path c:\temp\* -include a*,b*
get-childitem -path c:\temp\* -exclude a*,b*
get-childitem -path c:\temp\* -include a*,b* -exclude *.log,*.tmp
# same as above, but explicitly recurse if that's what you want
get-childitem -path c:\temp\* -include a*,b* -recurse
get-childitem -path c:\temp\* -exclude a*,b* -recurse
get-childitem -path c:\temp\* -include a*,b* -exclude *.log,*tmp -recurse
If I execute the "naked" get-childitem command, the asterisk doesn't matter...
# same results
get-childitem c:\temp
get-chileitem c:\temp\*
If this isn't considered a bug, can you explain why the inconsistency between the two parameters when combined with the -path parameter?
Thanks,
Scott

The Get-ChildItem cmdlet syntax is horrific for advanced use. It's not a bug in the classic sense, so you shouldn't call it that. However, feel free to call it awful, ugly, disastrous, or any other deprecatory adjective you like - it really is
nasty.
Get-ChildItem's unusual behavior is rooted in one of the more 'intense' dialogues between developers and users in the beta period. Here's how I recall it working out; some details are a bit fuzzy for me at this point.
Get-ChildItem's original design was as a tool for enumerating items in a namespace -
similar to but not equivalent to dir and
ls. The syntax and usage was going to conform to standard PowerShell (Monad at the time) guidelines.
In a nutshell, what this means is that the Path parameter would have truly just meant Path - it would not have been usable as a combination path specification and result filter, which it is now. In other words
(1) dir c:\temp
means you wanted to return children of the container c:\temp
(2) dir c:\temp\*
means you wanted to return children of all containers inside
c:\temp. With (2), you would never get c:\tmp\a.txt returned, since a.txt is not a container.
There are reasons that this was a good idea. The parameter names and filtering behavior was consistent with the evolving PowerShell design standards, and best of all the tool would be straightforward to stub in for use by namespace
providers consistently.
However, this produced a lot of heated discussion. A rational, orthogonal tool would not allow the convenience we get with the dir command for doing things like this:
(3) dir c:\tmp\a*.txt
Possibly more important was the "crash" factor. It's so instinctive for admins to do things like (3) that our fingers do the typing when we list directories, and the instant failure or worse, weird, dissonant output we would get with a more pure Path
parameter is exactly like slamming into a brick wall.
At this point, I get a little fuzzy about the details, but I believe the Get-ChildItem syntax was settled on as a compromise that wouldn't derail people expecting files when they do (3), but would still allow more complex use. I think that this
is done essentially by treating all files as though they are containers for themselves. This saves a lot of pain in basic use, but introduces other pain for advanced use.
This may shed some light on why the tool is a bit twisted, but it doesn't do a lot to help with your particular wrapping problem. You'll almost certainly need to do some more complicated things in attempting to wrap up Get-ChildItem. Can you describe some
details of what your intent is with the wrapper? What kind of searches by what kind of users, maybe? With those details, it's likely people can point out some specific approaches that can give more consistent results.

How to add the line item text in the Ledger line item report

Hi SAP Gurus,
I having one requirement from the user. He wants the line item text which we will enter in FB60/FB70/FB50 has to be shown in the Ledger line item report. Right now this field is not available. Is there any possible we can make this line item text in the ledger line item report i.e. FBL1N/FBL3N/FBL5N?
advance thanks for the help.
Regards,
Deva.

Hi,
You can do the below to get this. (You can change the names of the function modules as per your wish/ organization naming convention):-
Step 1:-
Create function module Z_GET_SGTXT as below:-
Import:-
BELNR LIKE BKPF-BELNR
BUKRS LIKE BKPF-BUKRS
BUZEI LIKE BSEG-BUZEI
GJAHR LIKE BKPF-GJAHR
Export:-
PRCTR LIKE BSEG-SGTXT
FUNCTION Z_GET_SGTXT.
""Local Interface:
*" IMPORTING
*" VALUE(BELNR) LIKE BKPF-BELNR
*" VALUE(BUKRS) LIKE BKPF-BUKRS
*" VALUE(BUZEI) LIKE BSEG-BUZEI
*" VALUE(GJAHR) LIKE BKPF-GJAHR
*" EXPORTING
*" VALUE(SGTXT) LIKE BSEG-SGTXT
SELECT SINGLE SGTXT FROM BSEG INTO SGTXT WHERE GJAHR = GJAHR
AND BELNR = BELNR
AND BUKRS = BUKRS
AND BUZEI = BUZEI.
ENDFUNCTION.
Step 2:-
Then create the Function Modules as below:-
Z_LINE_ITEMS_GET_SGTXT (Copy of SAMPLE_INTERFACE_00001650)
FUNCTION Module Z_LINE_ITEMS_GET_SGTXT.
""Local Interface:
*" IMPORTING
*" VALUE(I_POSTAB) LIKE RFPOS STRUCTURE RFPOS
*" EXPORTING
*" VALUE(E_POSTAB) LIKE RFPOS STRUCTURE RFPOS
Initialize Output by using the following line
E_POSTAB = I_POSTAB.
E_POSTAB = I_POSTAB. "<-- important
CALL FUNCTION 'Z_GET_SGTXT'
EXPORTING
BELNR = I_POSTAB-BELNR
BUKRS = I_POSTAB-BUKRS
BUZEI = I_POSTAB-BUZEI
GJAHR = I_POSTAB-GJAHR
IMPORTING
SGTXT = E_POSTAB-SGTXT
EXCEPTIONS
OTHERS = 1.
ENDFUNCTION.
Step3:-
Transaction FIBF:-
Settings -> Products -> of a Customer
SGTXT Text in Line Item Display Active
Settings -> P/S Module -> of a Customer
00001650 SGTXT Z_LINE_ITEMS_GET_SGTXT
Step 4:-
Create the layout for FBL*N with display of the TEXT.
Regards,
Gaurav

How to store lead-time and price per MPN for a single Item

We are probably one of the only CEM's that use Oracle Applications in a one-to-one MPN-IPN (Oracle Item Part Number) relationship. We do not currently store multiple Manufacturers under a single Item. Rather, we use the Customer Item Cross Reference to rank the customer's AML, with each IPN tied to a single MPN.
We are looking at moving into a one-to-many "world" in Oracle but are not sure how we can handle different pricing, lead-time, preference, status (prototype, production, obsolete, do not use), etc. for each Manufacturer's Part Number under a single Item. How are other CM's handling this???

Hi Greg,
Unfortunately, DIAdem Datafinder doesn't really support much in the way
of Date/Time search outside of the File Level Creation Date property.
In order to make the creation time of the Channels searchable you would
want to create some custom properties (or use the existing RegisterInt1
- RegisterInt6) to define your own searchable properties.
For example, since you know that you have one TDM file per day, you can
start your search by find the desired day on the File Property Level,
searching the "Creation Date" property. When you store your TDM
properties, you could store the hour creation as an integer (and
thereby searchable) in one of the RegisterInt properties of the
channel, or create your own custom "Hour" channel. You could similarly
save the minute and second property in their own custom properties.
Then, since you're saving integer values, you can then search those
values to determine the time that the channel was created.
I realize that this isn't ideal or elegant, as in total it requires 4
searches (date, hour, minute, second). But that is the most
straightforward way of searching your channels by creation date/time.
Hope this helps Greg, let me know if you have any other questions.
Dan Weiland

Problem with space between rendered items in a list component

Hi,
Thanks again for taking your time to read my newbie posts. I found (and prove) over the internet that I can set some space between rendered items of a list based component using paddingTop and padding Bottom (vertical space), so I asume that I can do the same thing with paddingLeft and paddingRight. But as a matter of fact, it didn't work, why? that's what I would like to know, and how can I solve this. I would really apreciate if you help me do this.
Thanks again
Sebastián Toro O.

Yeah, it is inconsistent. The renderer has to implement paddingLeft/Right.
It was done this way for performance reasons. The Spark List in Flex 4 is
more consistent.

Task Flow Transaction Handling Inconsistent between JDeveloper R1 & R2.

We have a solution developed using Jdeveloper 11.1.2.1.0.
To describe the use case I will use the HR schema.
The user must be able to view Regions and navigate to Countries and Locations in a hierarchical way. At each level he must be allowed to view and maintain the detail of the current record at that level. The user must also be able to navigate directly to a level and perform a search to view the data and from there be allowed to to view and maintain the detail of the current record at that level.
So I have created the following design to achieve this and take into consideration that I need to reuse my task flows that maintain the data.
Business Services (Model Project)
1. HierarchyAM, containing Read Only VO’s of the various levels nested by association/view link.
2. Region + Countries + Locations
3. Search#Level#AM, A separate AM for each level, containing the Read Only VO per level.
4. Maintain#Level#AM, A Separate AM for each level, containing an updateable VO per level.
UI (View Controller Project)
I created the following BTF’s (To try and keep the post short as possible I will only provide detail for a single level to explain the issues)
*1. HiererchyBTF*
a.     Contains a fragment.
b.     Added RegionHierarchyBtf, CountryHierarchyBTF, LocationHierarchyBTF to the above fragment as dynamic regions.
c.     Task flow transaction <No Controller Transaction>, isolated.
*2. RegionHierarchyBTF. (The same BTF’s are created for each level in the hierarchy)*
a.     Contains a fragment.
b.     Exposed HierarchyAM<RegionRoVO>
c.     Task flow transaction <No Controller Transaction>, shared.
d.     Includes a call to the EditRegionBTF.
*3. SearchRegionBTF (The same BTF’s are created for each level in the hierarchy)*
a.     Contains a fragment.
b.     Exposed SearchRegionAM<RegionRoVO>
c.     Task flow transaction <No Controller Transaction>, isolated.
d.     Includes a call to the EditRegionBTF.
*4. EditRegionBTF*
a.     Contains a fragment.
b.     Exposed MaintainRegionAM<RegionVO>
c.     Task flow transaction <Use Existing Transaction if Possible>, isolated.
Runtime behaviour with above configuration.
1.     Running the HiererchyBTF and navigation the levels works in all versions.
2.     Calling an edit BTF allows me to edit the current record and successfully commit the data in all versions.
3.     Calling an edit BTF for the same record immediately thereafter, allows me to edit the record and commit the data successfully in all versions.
4.     Running any of search BTF’s and calling the edit BTF works in all versions.
Runtime behaviour and changing the EditRegionBTF task flow transaction to Shared.
1.     Running the HiererchyBTF and navigation the levels works in all versions.
2.     Calling an edit BTF allows me to edit the current record in the table and successfully commit the data in all versions.
3.     Calling an edit BTF for the same record immediately thereafter, allows me to edit the record and commit the data successfully in 11.1.1.4.0 & 11.1.1.6.0 only. If I perform the same scenario in 11.1.2.1.0 I receive the following exception.
a.     JBO-25003: Object MaintainLocationAM of type ApplicationModule is not found.
4.     Repeating the process, but after editing the first record, edit the second record in the table the error is not encountered. If, after successfully editing the second record and committing the data successfully, I again edit the first record I edited, I receive the same exception as in point 3.
5.     Running any of search BTF’s and calling the edit BTF works in all versions.
For the purpose of having a reusable edit task flow, I need to have the task flow transaction configuration as <Use Existing Transaction if Possible>, shared. This enables me to have the edit task flow as a parent as well as a child task flow and use the task flow functionality irrespective if it is controlling the transaction or not.
My questions are;
1. Is my design acceptable for the solution I am developing, I am more specifically questioning my separation of the AM’s to achieve loosely coupled task flows.
2. Is there a bug (I have done a search on MOS) that details this behaviour.
3. As, in my opinion, this is a common requirement, why is there inconsistency between the versions.
The demo for each version can be made available.
Regards.
Leon.
Edited by: Leon Dorfling on Feb 21, 2013 1:44 AM

Hi Frank,
+1. Its the first sting I stumbled on reading your post. Unless the read-only view object AMs are shared across users (application scope) I don't see why you want to have them in a separate AM. I don't see a benefit in a purely read-only view object that is not backed up by entities and thus would follow Oracle's recommendation to always use entities with view objects.+
The read-only vo's are based on eo's. I separated the AM as the search use cases are independent of one another. So my understanding, from a performance perspective, is to not have all the read-only vo's of the entire hierarchy of products in a single AM if I am only going to access one of them. If I do not understand correctly, can you please assist me in better understanding.
+2. For sure this behavior doesn't sound right and should be filed. You may want to check 11.2.3 in case it has been fixed in there already.+
As posted by Chris, I have through MOS found that it has been fixed in a later version.
Btw.: "Calling an edit BTF for the same record immediately thereafter, allows me to edit the record and commit the data successfully" how do you call this task flow dynamic region or task flow call activity ?
The BTF's are called using a backing bean.
Regards
Leon.

SDO_UTIL.EXTRACT fail when single item in geometry collection

Hi folks,
Didn't we have a discussion a while back on whether geometry collections are valid when they only contain a single item? Darned if I can find it with the OTN search function. I think back then the issue was either a multipolygon or multistring with a single item.
Anyhow this time around I have a 2004 geometry collection that for no particular reason happens to only contain a single point. This collection geometry with one item validates TRUE. Just like with multipolygons and multistrings when I attempt to EXTRACT the result I just get back the input geometry (the 2004 in this case) rather than the component part (the 2001). I think this is because there is a test in the EXTRACT routine that checks if there is but one element and if so then returns the original input assuming the original input was gtype 1,2 or 3. Unlike a multipolygon or multistring where I can just assume the output is a polygon or string respectively, with a geometry collection I am rather stumped to figure it out short of inspecting the SDO_ELEM_INFO array. At that point I am kind of writing my own EXTRACT function. I guess I have to do that.
Anyhow, this would lead one to believe that a geometry collection with only one element is not really valid for Oracle Spatial. Or is this a bug in SDO_UTIL.EXTRACT? I have no recollection if that previous conversation ever decided this question. I might humbly suggest that either SDO_UTIL.EXTRACT should successfully unpack the single item or SDO_GEOM.VALIDATE_GEOMETRY_WITH_CONTEXT should report an error for this type of collection.
I looked over metalink and cannot find anything logged on the issue. The results are the same on 10gR2 and 11gR2.
If anyone remembers the previous discussion please post the link.
Cheers,
Paul
SELECT
SDO_UTIL.EXTRACT(
   SDO_GEOMETRY(
      2004,
      8265,
      NULL,
      SDO_ELEM_INFO_ARRAY(
         1,
         1,
         1
      SDO_ORDINATE_ARRAY(
         -100.515216953125005261426849756389856339,
         39.98440002562352191262107226066291332245
   1
FROM
dual

Ok,
Let's make a quick distinction between the SDO_GTYPE (all four digits) and the lower-case "gtype" meaning the last digit - e.g. the "type of geometry" per the Oracle Spatial book.
I submitted the above SDO_UTIL.EXTRACT issue to Oracle support yesterday and as I rather expected the response was that this is "expected behavior". The analyst noted that my what I called a collection per its gtype was not a collection but a point. He made the distinction between the gtype and the "geometry definition". I assume by that he means the elem_info_array. So in fact djonio (user 633187) back in November 2009 under Matt's thread had the best answer. I don't see anyway to credit him. :) Hey djonio if you post a response I will give this answer to you.
So the gtype is in truth a kind of convenience marker or fancy hat "hinting" at the contents of the geometry object, but by no means defining it. A point wearing a 2004 hat is still a point and a valid Oracle Spatial point at that. If you want to "really" know what a geometry is you need to unpack and inspect the elem_info_array. So those of us writing code which is only inspecting the gtype are going down the wrong road particularly when our data might be of suspect quality. As djonio says the gtype is a performance shortcut. In my defense I think lots of folks (e.g. certain software from California) work off the gtype alone. So its not like we can just set the gtypes all to be "9999" and say the heck with it all. :) So incorrect gtypes are bad as they hose the performance shortcut that the gtype allows (and certain software demands) but a bad gtype is NOT an invalid geometry. I am not sure I am entirely sold on that idea as VALIDATE_GEOMETRY certainly looks at the gtype when doing its evaluation. Alas, I suppose its all shades of gray here as validate geometry is just responding to my gtype "hint" to give me the best feedback on my input. Perhaps there is a distinction between "good", "bad" and "imprecise" gtypes.
My next question is if the gtype system is just a fancy hat, then how best to catalog basic geometry types? Both multi-points and point clouds share gtype 5 but the elem_info marks them as being unique data types that really require unique handling (I never use point clouds so feel free to argue that point). So rather than just mumbling "5" over and over to myself, what vocabulary might be used? Is it GML time? Hmm, does GML even have a point cloud datatype? I suppose I just make something up? Does anyone else have a system they are using?
Thanks for reading this rambling, feel free to shoot down everything I say. I clearly need more coffee this morning.
Paul

In GL Master- Diff between Open Item & Balance Summary

Hi Experts
In GL Master- Diff between Open Item & Balance Summary ?
Regards
Ramakanth

Hi,
Open Item :- Select this tick if you want to see all individual line items that makes the total of the account. By selecting this tick you will be able to see both open and cleared items. GR/IR accounts should be managed on open item basis.
Line Item:- Tick this if you want to see the balance of an account by individual postings. Generally Revenue & Expense accounts should be managed on line item basis.
Hope this will help.
Regards
Valay Pandya

Inconsistency between a document field and the prof. segment number

Hi,
While processing an invoice in one company code for vendor# XXX with the PO# AAAA line# 10, it is showing below error message while posting. Please advise on the below error or fix the issue to post the invoice in to SAP. The using screen T-code is miro.
Inconsistency between a document field and the prof. segment number
*Message no. KE396
*Diagnosis
A line item was assigned to a profitability segment (number 0008629207) which has the value 0000101000 for characteristic Profit Center. The original document (FI document, sales order, internal order, etc.), however, contains 0000102020 in this field. It is therefore inconsistent with the profitability segment found.
System response
The characteristics in Profitability Analysis (CO-PA) must have the same characteristic values as the original document. For example, you cannot assign a sales order to a different customer or product than the one contained in the original sales order. If you wish to fill the characteristics with different contents, you must change the original fields.
Procedure
Enter the correct characteristic values on the CO-PA assignment screen. The system will automatically assign a corresponding profitability segment number. If it is not possible to enter values in some of these fields, delete the entire assignment to a profitability segment number and then enter it again.
As a rule, you should first enter the fields in the original sender document and then make the assignment to a profitability segment.
What should I do for the above pl ?
Regards
Murali

Hi,
While doing PGR at VL32N, we are facing this error. Can someone assist.
Regards,
Aruna

Toggle between Web Items using an Image link in WAD 7.0

Hello,
i want to toggle between Web items using an image link: e.g. on my template I have a visible table and a hidden chart, now when I click on a small chart image I want the table to get hidden and the chart to get visible. I know that this is possible using a button group, but I need to make this possible using an image.
My approach is the following:
1. Using a script item with 2 commands of type SET_ITEM_PARAMETERS from the command wizard, from which one command hides the table and one command makes the chart visible.
2. Writing a hyperlink which calls up the script using the image as source.
Now my problem:
This works only if I'm using ONE command of type SET_ITEM_PARAMETERS in the script function. So I can either make the chart visible or hide the table. When I insert a second command in the java script nothing works anymore. However, I need to use both commands at once in order to make it useful. I don't know how to program in javascript, can you help me out?!
Thanks,
Norbert
PS: I could show you the javascript code which was created automatically by the web application designer including both commands, but as I've just seen it in the preview it looks totally messed up since it doesn't get formatted corrected.

Hi Norbert,
There is an easier approach. In the button group item, you can insert an image and a description. Just open the parameters of your button there you will find the parameter 'icon'. Insert an image there and leave the 'caption' empty.
Best regards,
Janine

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SINGLE LEVEL AND MULTI LEVEL COSTING

Sir,'
Please explain the difference between Single Level and Multi Level Costing in Detail
thanking You

While using material ledger, we can use the single level or multi-level price determination for valuation of inventory.
Procurement processes are used in Product Cost Controlling to determine procurement costs and to present those costs. Purchase Order, for example, is single-level procurement and Production is multilevel procurement.
Single-level material price determination calculates the periodic unit price for a material. The standard price and the cumulative single-level differences of the period are taken into account. Single-level material price determination takes into account the differences that arise directly when a material is procured.
Multilevel price determination calculates the periodic unit price for a material. The standard price, the single-level differences cumulated in the period, the differences between planned and actual prices, as well as input material differences (multilevel differences) are all taken into account.
Single-level material price determination is a prerequisite for Multi-level price determination.

Divide discount of free goods between several items (SO)

Hi gurus,
I need to split the cost of the free good between the items generating it, i.e. if the customer buy 5pcs of Mat A and 4pcs of Mat B he gets 1pcs of Mat C for free. He will only see the original price for the "main" items and zero for the free good but intenally the profit margin of the "main" materials should be deducted with the cost of the free good and the free good should have full profit margin as if it was sold for full price.
I'm aware that this is not standard SAP functionality and that I probably need to change a user exit in program MV45AFZZ.
Please help me with this problem! Any advice or tips are highly appreciated.
Best regards,
Mia

Is it possible to solve this problem by modifying a user exit? I was considering creating a new pricing condition which should be inflicted between the net value and profit margin by the user exit so that the customer only sees the original values for the main materials but the profit margins are reduced with the price of the free goods directly in the order. Is this doable?
/Mia

Inconsistency between single items & totals in FM ledger

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for