Is seperate request numbers for all prerequisite & applied notes possible?

Hi
I understood that using SNOTE for Note execution, all of the changes done including those in the prerequisite notes are covered in one request number.
The question is, is it possible (any options setting) to automatically generate different request number for each notes (prerequite notes) execution?

Hi
You can create a "Approved" notification to be sent out at the last stage of the path, and apply the custom messages to that notification per respective last stage/path.
However, if you are planning to use the %PROVISIONING% or %PROVISIONING_WITHOUT_PASSWORD% variable within any of these custom notifications, it only seems to work in the notifications sent out at the end of the request/ AR Close set up in the Global section (screen 1 in MSMP).
There is a note at the end of the SAP note that describes this limitation:
Remark: Class CL_GRFN_MSMP_BADI_END_OF_PATH implements following logic:
At end of each path of Access Request, workflow email will be sent to msmp agent GRAC_USER using template GRAC_AR_CLOSE
Hope that helps.

Similar Messages

How to find out the GR Numbers for which IR has not been done

Hi Sap Gurus,
Can anybody tell me how to find out the G R Numbers for which Invoice Receipt has not been done. Any TC or ant standard process to find out.
Thanks N Regards,
Siddhartha

Hi Siddarth,
Solution :
        1) Go to SE16 - Table Name : EKBE (PO History)
        2) Field - BUDAT (Posting Date)
        3) Transaction event Type:
                         - 1 (Only GR's )
                         - 2 (Both GR and IR)
        4) We can fetch both GR Numbers and also PO Numbers for which IR has not been done if transaction event - 1.
In addition to MB5S, you can try this also...

For All Entries is NOT better than INNER JOIN in most cases

I quote from Siegfried Boes' excellent post here: Will writing an inner join be better or creating a view?
For all the FOR ALL ENTRIES lovers ... there is no proof for these reappearing recommendation.
There is nearly nobody who receives forum points, who recommends FOR ALL ENTRIES instead of Joins. What is the reason ???
It is easier to prove the opposite. A Join is a nested loop inside the database, a FOR ALL ENTRIES is partly outside of the database. FOR ALL ENTRIES works in blocks, joins on totals.
FOR ALL ENTRIES are not recommded on really large tables, because the chances are too high that
too many records are transferred.
People prefer FOR ALL ENTRIES, because JOINs are not so easy to understand. Joins can go wrong, but with a bit of understanding they can be fixed.
Some Joins are slow and can not be fixed, but then the FOR ALL ENTRIES would be extremely slow.
There are several kinds of views:
- projection views, i.e. only one table involved just fields reduced
- join views, several tables, joins conditions stored in dictionary
- materialized views, here the joined data are actually stored in the database. Storing and synchronisation has to be done manually.
Only the last one creates real overhead. It should be the exception.
Join Views and Joins are nearly identical. The view is better for reuse. The join is better in complicated, becuase if the access goes wrong, it can often be fixed by adding a hint. Hints can not be added to views.
Abraham Bukit points out:
If it is cluster table, (you can't use join). If it is buffered table, I would also say avoid join.
If they all are transaction table which are not buffered and are not cluster tables.
He further supports Siegfried's statement that FAE is easier to undestand than INNER JOINs.
Thomas Zloch says, regarding buffered tables:
At least think twice, maybe compare runtimes if in doubt.
So, unless someone has some EVIDENCE that FOR ALL ENTRIES is better, I don't think we want to see this discussed further.
Kind regards
Matt

To give food for thought here's an example I gave in a thread:
If you have a statement like
SELECT ... FOR ALL ENTRIES IN FAE_itab WHERE f = FAE_itab-f.
SAP sends it to the database depending how the parameter rsdb/prefer_union_all is set:
rsdb/prefer_union_all = 0 =>
SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[1]-f
          OR    f = FAE_itab[2]-f
          OR    f = FAE_itab[N]-f
You have some influence of the generated statement type: Instead of OR'ed fields an IN list can be used
if you have only a single coulmn N to compare:
rsdb/prefer_in_itab_opt parameter:
SELECT ... WHERE f IN (itab[1]-f, itab[2]-f, ..., itab[N]-f)
rsdb/prefer_union_all = 1 =>
SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[1]-f
UNION ALL SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[2]-f
UNION ALL SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[N]-f
see: Note 48230 - Parameters for the SELECT ... FOR ALL ENTRIES statement
As you can see for the 2nd parameter several statements are generated and combined with a UNION ALL,
the first setting generates statements with OR's (or uses IN if possible) for the entries in FAE_itab.
I give you a little example here (my parameters are set in a way that the OR's are translated to IN lists; i traced the execution in ST05)
Select myid into table t_tabcount from mydbtable
for all entries in t_table    " 484 entries
    where myid = t_table-myid .
ST05 trace:
|Transaction SEU_INT|Work process no 0|Proc.type DIA|Client 200|User |
|Duration |Obj. name |Op.    |Recs.|RC    |Statement|
| 640|mydbtable |PREPARE|   | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( :A0 , :A1 , :A2 , :A3 , :A4 ) AND "myid" = :A5|
| 2|mydbtable |OPEN   |   | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
| 2.536|mydbtable |FETCH |    0| 1403|   |
| 3|mydbtable |REOPEN |   | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
| 118|mydbtable |FETCH | 0| |
| 2|mydbtable |REOPEN | | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ) AND "myid" = 72     |
| 3|mydbtable |REOPEN | | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 475 , 476 , 477 , 478 , 479 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
| 94|mydbtable |FETCH | 0| 1403|   |
| 2|mydbtable |REOPEN |   | 0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 480 , 481 , 482 , 483 , 484 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
You see the IN list contained 5 entries each , wich made up about 97 statements for all 484 entries.
For every statment you have a single fetch operation wich means a separate access to the database.
If you would replace the FAE with a join you would only have one fetch to the database.
With the example above we can derive these observations:
1. From database point of view these settings kill performance when you access a big table and/or have a lot of entries or columns in your FAE_itab. Furthermore, you hide information what data you will access
at all and thus you block the database from creating a more efficient execution plan because it DOESN'T KNOW wich data you will select in the next step. I.e. it may be more efficient to scan the table in one shot instead of having many index accesses - but the database can make this decision only if it can examine ONE statement that has ALL the information of what data to retrieve.
2. A second impact is that with every statement execution you trigger the allocation of database resources
wich will contribute to the overhead described above.
Said that, FAE can never be a replacement for joining big tables (think of having a table with thousands of records in a FAE table )
Edited by: kishan P on Nov 2, 2010 2:16 PM - Format Fixed

Message no. M8147 : - Account determination for entry TLRG KDM not possible

Dear Friends,
We encounter with error message M8147:-Account determination for entry TLRG KDM not possible while posting a MIRO entry, here is the brief analysis.
       Goods receipts is posted the following entry with exchange rate 3.81650
                     RM-Paper A/c                 USD 31075.24 and ARS 118598.67
                           GR/IR Clearing           USD 31075.24 and ARS 118598.67
Now while posting MIRO exchange rate is 3.8863, as there is difference exists with GR rate system is trying to identy GL account from transaction key KDM (Materials management exch.rate diffs) but we have not mantained any account there.
Now what I want to understand is that I have seen the cases when there is a exchange rate difference it will be adjusted to Expense A/c in this case it should be RM-Paper A/c but why system is looking for an entry to KDM transaction key.
Please give us an idea why system is behaving is like this and how to achive the funtionality of adjusting the exchange rate difference to expense A/c.

hi all,
I am also facing this error
Account determination for entry ____ GBB ____ BSA 7900 not possible .
The system cannot find account for posting. OBYC i have checked but not getting any solution. Can you suggest something?
Regards,
Diptanshu gupta

Document is in transfer for purchase order.Creation not possible

Dear All,
We did partial confirmation in EBP and later when trying to do confiramtion for the remaining quantiy getting the message"document is in transfer for purchase order.Creation not possible"
We are taking this problem in production as well as in quality systems also.
What are possible reason and how to solve it.
kindly share your views.
Thank you.

Hi yshu,
use tcode bd87 in SRM to check for failed confirmation IDOC (type MBGMCR).
The double click the status record to see the exact cause of the failure.
Rectify the error. Then try to execute the IDOC from BD87 tcode.
For a few errors you may not be able to execute the IDOC but to create a new confirmation in SRM. In such cases, follow the below procedure..
There should be an entry for the confirmation in the transfer table BBP_DOCUMENT_TAB in SRM. Display the details.
Then run FM "BBP_DELETE_FROM_DOCUMENT_TAB" to delete the entry from the doc tab table.
Then post a new confirmation in SRM.
There is also a FM in SRM using which you can change the status of thefailed IDOC from 51 to 68 or 31.
Rgds,
MJ

Document in transfer for purchase order - creation not possible

Hi Experts,
we get this error when we do confirmation"'document in transfer for purchase order - creation not possible'"
any inputs are appreciated
Rg
sam

Hi All,
We have resolved the above problem.
When user does confirmation ,if it sucessfully created then there will be no entry in BBP_Document_tab table.If it's in error in process and next time when user tries to do GR then he will encounter a pop up message "Document in transfer for PO, creation not possible".
So we need to delete the entries from table BBP_DOCUMENT_TAB using FM BBP_DELETE_FROM_DOCUMENT_TAB.
Then check again in BBP_DOCUMENT_TAB now there will be noentry there...so now user can do the confirmation from SRM,he will not encounter this error now.
Thanks to all the ppl who has replied
sameer

Mapping for ND_FORM to ND_FORM not possible due to recursion

Hi Experts,
I am trying to define external context mapping...with the steps..say there are two components ZOMP1(in which i am using other component) and ZCOMP2(this is used in zcomp1)
1. IN the component zcomp2 I define ZCOMP1 under the used components
2.in the component controller of ZCOMP2 under properties tab I create controller usage of zcomp1 and two entries are created
3.I go to the context tab of component controller of zcomp2 and drag and drop the ND_FORM node from ZCOMP1 to context node of ZCOMP2
when I do a check I get the error
Mapping for ND_FORM to ND_FORM not possible due to recursion
Don't understand why am I getting this error though the node I am trying to map is not recursive?
This is what I see in long text of error:
Message no. SWDP_WB_TOOL263
Diagnosis
Mapping from ND_FORM to ND_FORM is not permitted, as ND_FORM has its own mapping that refers directly or indirectly to ND_FORM.
System Response
The mapping can neither be created nor used.
Procedure
If you receive this error message when you check a context or when you update the mapping to context node ND_FORM, delete the mapping to ND_FORM using the context menu function with the same name.
Please help,
Anubhav

Hi Anubhav,
following restrictions apply on recursion nodes:
1. You cannot nominate a recursive node to act as the data source in a context mapping relationship. Recursive node structures are restricted to the scope of a single controller.
2. The root node of a context cannot be used for a recursion.
Please check this...
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04s/helpdata/en/47/45641e80f81962e10000000a114a6b/content.htm
Also Cehck This,..
Enhancement FPM of Trip application
Cheers,
Kris.

Issue:Structure explosion for item 000020 is not possible...

Hello all,
i am getting this error when i am creating the sales order.so where i have to do the setting for resolving this issue.
Structure explosion for item 000020 is not possible
Message no. V1578
Diagnosis
You have tried to carry out a structure explosion within an exploded structure, but this is not possible.
For example, the system finds one component and one item category within an exploded BOM that leads to another BOM explosion in document processing. This is not possible because you can only explode a multi- level BOM and the explosion can only start with a document item that has not been generated by the previous explosion.
Similar problems occur when combining BoM explosion and product selection.
System Response
The system does not carry out the lower-level explosion.
Procedure
Configure the settings in Customizing, so that sub-items do not lead to another explosion. It might be that the wrong item category was determined for the sub-item.
Regards
Subrat

Dear G. Lakshmipathi,
my requirement is very simple
i have two levels one is header level material and another is child level material.
the stocks will be at child level
pricing will be at header level
so what will be will be the item catagory group and item catagory for header level item and for the child level item.
please help
Regards
Subrat

Error in BP transfer No contract account for premise- move out not possible

Hi experts,
I am trying to transfer a BP from its current premise to another premise in the Web IC screen. While doing so i am facing the error saying that " No contract account for premise->move out not possible". I checked the contract account for the premise through normal premise search and it is existing.
I am facing this problem only when i am trying to transfer the BP which has multiple premise, for BPs having single premise it is working fine.
Request you to help me in this regard.
Thanks and regards,
Madhukar.

Hi bigdogtim7,
Please check your inbox.
Thanks!
Linksys Support
http://support.linksys.com

Error M8147 Account determination for entry CPES PRD not possible

Hi all
Im getting this error when a try to make a goods receipt whit trx migo and materials whitout material number and GR goods receip: 101. I try with the trx omjj whith movement type 101 and account grouping and then I don´t know how to do, I read I need a new entry here, but I don´t know how to do this. Some one could tell me if I´m doing the things right or exist any other way to solve this problem?
Here´s the exactly message error.
Account determination for entry CPES PRD not possible
Message no. M8147
Diagnosis
The system did not find an account for this transaction. This means that the account determination for key CPES PRD is not maintained in MM Customizing (Valuation). The key is made up of:
Chart of account
Transaction key (= Posting transaction)
Valuation grouping code
Account grouping code
Valuation class
System Response
The system cannot update a G/L account for this transaction. You cannot post the transaction.
Procedure
Contact your system administrator.
If you have the authorization, check the Account determination in Customizing for Valuation.
Proceed
Note
The relevant posting transaction can be found in Table T030A.
Best regards
Edited by: Alvaro Olmos on Aug 21, 2010 2:36 PM
Edited by: Alvaro Olmos on Aug 21, 2010 2:40 PM

Hi,
Use t.code: OBYC, Double click PRD, Enter Chart of Account.In next screen ,click RULES in application tool bar & then in next screen select check box of Debit/Credit but do not select check boxes valuation class, valuation Modifier & account modifier & save.( not required as price difference will goto one generic G/L).
Now come back & again use t.code: OBYC, Enter Chart of Account, Double click PRD & enter your G/L account for Debit/Credit& save.
Now try your transaction doing MIGO, you would not have any error now.
Better involve FICO consultant for the above steps.
For more check the link:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2531210/SAP-FI-GL-CONFIGURATION
Regards,
Biju K

Assigning a new tax key for V0 and VAT not possible

Hi Experts,
Invoice is been created successfully in SUS , XML transfered to XI which in turn created the IDOC in ECC.
I get the below error while transferring theinvoice IDOC from XI to ECC.
Assigning a new tax key for V0 and VAT not possible
Message no. FD008
Diagnosis
In Financial Accounting customizing, the tax ID transferred in the invoice is missing so that the system cannot determine a tax code. The system could not determine an entry with the value V0 nor with the value VAT .
Procedure
In Financial Accounting customizing, include the external tax ID and a corresponding internal tax code for the present partner.
Please let me know if I am missing any setup in ECC as I have already maintained the setup in OBCA, OBCD and OMRY.
Thanks,
-Devi Swain

Hi Devi,
Can you please tell me ,how you resolved this issie,I am getting same error.I I have already maintained the setup in OBCA, OBCD and OMRY.
Thanks,
-Sunil

Account determination for entry CASI DIF not possible.

Hi Friends,
While doing Invoice (MIRO) against PO, I have encountered below error.
IR Error:
Account determination for entry CASI DIF not possible.
Please help to how to resolve.
Warm regds,
Raman,

Hi,
If you click on the message you will get help, it will show you exactly which entry in the auto account assignment table is missing. Note the details (COA valuation area etc.) then at the bottom of the message is a link to take you into the transaction where you can make the appropriate settings (assuming that you have access and this is not your production live system).
CASI may well be yyour chart of accounts and DIF is the transaction event key. The system needs to know which GL to post to in this situation.
Steve B

Account Determination for entry GCOA PRD not possible

Hi! we encountered this error during Invoice Receipt.   During IR, there is a decimal difference between the Invoice Balance in mir7 (in the upper right) and the PO amount. What we do is we put the the decimall difference in the Unplanned Del Costs under the details tab. But our problem is we encounter the error message Account Determination for entry GCOA PRD not possible.   I read that in the transaction key PRD: Price differences can also arise in the case of materials with moving average price if there is not enough stock to cover the invoiced quantity. In the case of goods movement in the negative range, the moving average price is not changed. Instead any price differences are posted to a price difference account.
The material in the PO that we are trying to IR have stocks in the system. My question is how can we know the number of stocks that should be available for us to be able to IR?
How can we also avoid these decimal differences between the IR and PO amount?
Thanks so much and appreciate your help..
Regards,
Paula

first thing
If there is small diffrence in Invoice total amount send my vendor and system calculated value and ther is small diffrence then it shoudl go to small diff account
this account should go in OBYC GCOA DIF hear u can give gl account , and also check if u have stet tolearance limit for this amount
SPRT ==MM == LIV == invoice block == Set Tolerance Limits
in this u set BD for ur company code.
if u do this then u will not require to put that small diffrence in unpland delivery cost.
Account Determination for entry GCOA PRD not possible
in OBYC for ur GCOA click on PRD key
and following should be the entry for ur Material valuation class
general modification      valuation class    gl account
(blank)                              xxxx                    xxxxx
PRA                                  xxxx                     xxxx
PRF                                   xxxx                      xxxx
PRU                                  XXXX                       XXXX
depending on ur posting rule set this
hope ur error will go
My question is how can we know the number of stocks that should be available for us to be able to IR?
when do MIRO or MIR7 system check what is the stock qty availabe at the point of posting
say Stk is 10 and u are posting 15 qty than system calculat the value for 10 and post the amount for 10 as inventory cost and remaning 5 will post to price dif account if ther eis change in rate of PO and invoice received.
hope this helps

Issue with MIGO- Account determination for entry ABCD FR1 not possible

Hi,
We create a PO with account assignment category - A.
When we are doing MIGO against this PO, error showing - Account determination for entry ABCD FR1 not possible.. (PO without material code)
I have already checked following points: -
1. First check Material Group in PO and through OMQW tcode, also checked mentioned valuation class against Material Group.
2. In OBYC, checked that in Transaction Key FR1 has the GL assignment with Chart of Accounts ABCD...
Please let me know now, how to fix this issue now...
Regards..

Hi,
Maintain Valuation modifier along with valuation class in OBYC.
And also Check the automatic account determination cofiguration once...
The below link helps you in configuaration .....
http://www.sapstudymaterials.com/2007/12/sap-mm-automatic-account-determination_16.html
Regards,
Udaya.
Edited by: udayareddy on Oct 15, 2011 11:17 AM

Seperate document numbers for STO POs ( Inter & Intra)

Hello,
Is it possible to have seperate PO document numbers for POs that are created for an ICOM vendor? So are standard POs would be 450* , while any POs created with an ICOM vendor (normally for STO purposes) Would be 540* or something like that?
Thanks
James

You can assign one external and one internal number range to one document type in standard system but you cannot define a logic. System will consume the numbers from the number range you defined, that's all (or user can input the number manually but this is not a solution for you I think).
So, you cannot achieve your goal via configuration, you need to develop your own solution. You can try e.g. exists M06B0003, M06B0004.

Is seperate request numbers for all prerequisite & applied notes possible?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for