Lock quantities for specific customers

Hi experts!
Does anyone have any idea on how to lock quantities for specific customers without creating additional warehouses?
Any ideas?
The customer is running 9.0 on SQL.
Br
Anders

Hi Anders,
To lock the quantities for specific customers would not be supported by B1 existing function unless you have batch control. The simplest way for you would be by a special warehouse. Otherwise, you may have to create add-on.
Thanks,
Gordon

Similar Messages

Layout for packing list cannot be set for specific customers

It is not possible to set an standard layout for the packing list for specific customers. So, if you have layouts in different languages, you have to check the standard layout every time before you print and to set the right one. In other documents it is possible to set an standard layout for specific customers/suppliers for example depending on the language.
kind regards,
Markus Niebergall

Hi Engin,
Have you followed the ios tutorial which sybase provides :
http://infocenter.sybase.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.sybase.infocenter.dc01213.0200/doc/html/title.html
if you get "login success" at console it seems everything fine there may be something missing.
Regards
Tahir

Lock Transaction for Specifi Users

Dear All,
Good Day,
We are planning to lock the transaction for specific user who doesnot use the transaction more than 3 months.
Please suggest me what will be the procedure.
Thanks in advance,.
Best Regards,
Suresh Kumar K

Hi Suresh,
Your idea of restricting users in using t-code is good practice. But as of now there is nothing like you can restrict user by locking t-code only for tht user/users alone.
1. You can lock the T-code but this will affect entire system.
2, You can remove t-code from the role, but this affect other user and if you wanted to make another role for only this user it will start getting to be tedious job, since you have to delete some roles create some other and alos user may use some t-code once every quarter for some of quarter end results and you have to seperate these t-code from others which was not possible, this will not workout so easily.
The only option could be probably if user doesnot login for more than 3months just lock him.
Regards...

How can I distribute an app for specific customers only

I have developed an app that our customers can take to a remote site, input data at the site, then return to the office and upload their data to software that they purchased from us. This app would be useless to anybody that does not have our software.
We could put it in the App Store but anybody could download it (not that it would do them any good). We would like to have an easy way for our customers to obtain the app (like the Store), but not just make it available to anybody. It is
free to our customers since they already have a license for our software.
I am aware of the enterprise sideloading option but that seems problematic as well and your own documentation says to use the store if you are deploying to users outside your company: "Enterprise
apps usually fall into one of two categories: apps you deploy to users outside of your company (including customers and business partners), and apps you deploy only to users within your company. If
you want to make your app available to people outside of your company, your best option is to list the app in the Windows Store. "
In addition, with enterprise sideloading, there seems to be some sort of licensing requirement and you have to purchase 100 of them? Why is there a licensing fee if you can upload your app to the store and customers can get it for free? Our customers
are not going to want to purchase 100 licenses since they only need a handful and we are not going to provide them either. So, back to the Windows Store.
There should be some sort of Store option that maybe requires a password to access and download the app, plus provides a category that is actually suitable for enterprise apps (the categories in the store are very limited and none seem applicable).
Anyhow, I'm hoping you can help clear this up for us.
Thank you,
Karen Healey

Hi Juan,
Please see the link below mentioned for Adobe Story Plus.
https://creative.adobe.com/products/story-plus?promoid=KLXKW
Let me know if you need any assistance.
Thanks!
Eshant

Different GL needs to pickup when we do PGI for specific Customers

Hi Team,
our client is looking for scenario as below.
when we do the PGI system will pickup the GL's from the OBYC settings based on the condition.
i.e COGS 123 a/c DR
inventory A/c
for all scenarios.
now client is expecting when i creat SO for specific customer and if i do PGI system should pick different COGS a/c not 123 considering above example.
please help me out is there any exit or badi or enhancement spot for this.
Regards,
Raman

Hi Subho da
We cant change transaction type based on Customer
One option is to create a Z movement type and assign a new modifier in OMJJ instead of VAX
Usually, PGI is done from 601 movement type which triggers GBB VAX
Create a Copy of 601 and change VAX to ZVX and assign another GL in GBB ZVX in OBYC
Br. Ajay M

Material block for specific customers:

Hi Guru's,
I am stuck with the above problem, system should block accessing some of the products/items to few customers.
I tried to search in the forum but i didn't get the proper solution.
Could you please solve this?
Sushil

Hi
This can be done thro listing and exclusion functionality which is readily available in standard SAP
In T code VB01 you can use standard exclusion type B001 and create condition records for that customer material combination and that will ensure those customers will not get those materials in sales orders
This will suit yoour requirement
A background config is reqd in Inimg-sd-basic functions---listing and exclusion
Regards
Raja

Over delivery Tolerance for specific customers

hi, in shipping tab in XD02, i have entered 20% in "OverDelivert Tolerance" field. but still, the system is alowing to make the delivery quantity more than 20% than in Sales order quantity.
the requirement is, if ordered quanitity is let say 100 Ea, then customer's delivery order must not accept more than 120 EA (meaning 20% over tolerance). hows that possible.
experts..please comment.
thanks.

Hi there,
For this you will have to write a code in delivery USEREXIT_SAVE_DOCUMENT in prog SAPMV50A. Check if the LIPS-LFIMG >= 120% VBAP-KWMENG. If yes, then donot allow save. Hope this helps.
Or you can use KNVV-UEBTO to check the over delivery tolorence & then compare LIPS-LFIMG with VBAP-KWMENG. To get KNVV, pass the value of delivery into VBPA-VBELN to get the value of PARVW=AG. Then pass the value of VBPA-PARVW into KNVV-KUNNR to get KNVV-UEBTO.
Likewise to get the relevant sales order for the delivery, pass delivery num into VBFA-VBELN. Sales order is stored in VBFA-VBELV.
Regards,
Sivanand

Find lock object for field

Hi Friends,
I have one qurey. I would like to know the lock object for field MATNR.
Any suggestion how I can find it out the lock object for specific field.
Regards,
Poonam

hi,
GOTO se11.
select Lock object Radio button.
Press F4.
A popup appears, in that popup, under Short Description, type
*Material* and press enter. you will get a list of lock objects, select your required.
Always give the first letter in CAPS. like *Material*.

Re: Transactions and Locking Rows for Update

Dale,
Sounds like you either need an "optimistic locking" scheme, usually
implemented with timestamps at the database level, or a concurrency manager.
A concurrency manager registers objects that may be of interest to multiple
users in a central location. It takes care of notifying interested parties
(i.e., clients,) of changes made to those objects, using a "notifier" pattern.
The optimistic locking scheme is relatively easy to implement at the
database level, but introduces several problems. One problem is that the
first person to save their changes "wins" - every one else has to discard
their changes. Also, you now have business policy effectively embedded in
the database.
The concurrency manager is much more flexible, and keeps the policy where
it probably belongs. However, it is more complex, and there are some
implications to performance when you get to the multiple-thousand-user
range because of its event-based nature.
Another pattern of lock management that has been implemented is a
"key-based" lock manager that does not use events, and may be more
effective at managing this type of concurrency for large numbers of users.
There are too many details to go into here, but I may be able to give you
more ideas in a separate note, if you want.
Don
At 04:48 PM 6/5/97 PDT, Dale "V." Georg wrote:
I have a problem in the application I am currently working on, which it
seems to me should be easily solvable via appropriate use of transactions
and database locking, but I'm having trouble figuring out exactly how to
do it. The database we are using is Oracle 7.2.
The scenario is as follows: We have a window where the user picks an
object from a dropdown list. Some of the object's attributes are then
displayed in that window, and the user then has the option of editing
those attributes, and at some point hitting the equivalent of a 'save'button
to write the changes back to the database. So far, so good. Now
introduce a second user. If user #1 and user #2 both happen to pull up
the same object and start making changes to it, user #1 could write back
to the database and then 15 seconds later user #2 could write back to the
database, completely overlaying user #1's changes without ever knowing
they had happened. This is not good, particularly for our application
where editing the object causes it to progress from one state to the next,
and multiple users trying to edit it at the same time spells disaster.
The first thing that came to mind was to do a select with intent to update,
i.e. 'select * from table where key = 'somevalue' with update'. This way
the next user to try to select from the table using the same key would not
be able to get it. This would prevent multiple users from being able to
pull the same object up on their screens at the same time. Unfortunately,
I can think of a number of problems with this approach.
For one thing, the lock is only held for the duration of the transaction, so
I would have to open a Forte transaction, do the select with intent to
update, let the user modify the object, then when they saved it back again
end the transaction. Since a window is driven by the event loop I can't
think of any way to start a transaction, let the user interact with the
window, then end the transaction, short of closing and re-opening the
window. This would imply having a separate window specifically for
updating the object, and then wrapping the whole of that window's event
loop in a transaction. This would be a different interface than we wanted
to present to the users, but it might still work if not for the next issue.
The second problem is that we are using a pooled DBSession approach
to connecting to the database. There is a single Oracle login account
which none of the users know the password to, and thus the users
simply share DBSession resources. If one user starts a transaction
and does a select with intent to update on one DBSession, then another
user starts a transaction and tries to do the same thing on the same
DBSession, then the second user will get an error out of Oracle because
there's already an open transaction on that DBSession.
At this point, I am still tossing ideas around in my head, but after
speaking with our Oracle/Forte admin here, we came to the conclusion
that somebody must have had to address these issues before, so I
thought I'd toss it out and see what came back.
Thanks in advance for any ideas!
Dale V. Georg
Indus Consultancy Services [email protected]
Mack Trucks, Inc. [email protected]
>
>
>
>
====================================
Don Nelson
Senior Consultant
Forte Software, Inc.
Denver, CO
Corporate voice mail: 510-986-3810
aka: [email protected]
====================================
"I think nighttime is dark so you can imagine your fears with less
distraction." - Calvin

We have taken an optimistic data locking approach. Retrieved values are
stored as initial values; changes are stored seperately. During update, key
value(s) or the entire retieved set is used in a where criteria to validate
that the data set is still in the initial state. This allows good decoupling
of the data access layer. However, optimistic locking allows multiple users
to access the same data set at the same time, but then only one can save
changes, the rest would get an error message that the data had changed. We
haven't had any need to use a pessimistic lock.
Pessimistic locking usually involves some form of open session or DBMS level
lock, which we haven't implemented for performance reasons. If we do find the
need for a pessimistic lock, we will probably use cached data sets that are
checked first, and returned as read-only if already in the cache.
-DFR
Dale V. Georg <[email protected]> on 06/05/97 03:25:02 PM
To: Forte User Group <[email protected]> @ INTERNET
cc: Richards* Debbie <[email protected]> @ INTERNET, Gardner*
Steve <[email protected]> @ INTERNET
Subject: Transactions and Locking Rows for Update
I have a problem in the application I am currently working on, which it
seems to me should be easily solvable via appropriate use of transactions
and database locking, but I'm having trouble figuring out exactly how to
do it. The database we are using is Oracle 7.2.
The scenario is as follows: We have a window where the user picks an
object from a dropdown list. Some of the object's attributes are then
displayed in that window, and the user then has the option of editing
those attributes, and at some point hitting the equivalent of a 'save' button
to write the changes back to the database. So far, so good. Now
introduce a second user. If user #1 and user #2 both happen to pull up
the same object and start making changes to it, user #1 could write back
to the database and then 15 seconds later user #2 could write back to the
database, completely overlaying user #1's changes without ever knowing
they had happened. This is not good, particularly for our application
where editing the object causes it to progress from one state to the next,
and multiple users trying to edit it at the same time spells disaster.
The first thing that came to mind was to do a select with intent to update,
i.e. 'select * from table where key = 'somevalue' with update'. This way
the next user to try to select from the table using the same key would not
be able to get it. This would prevent multiple users from being able to
pull the same object up on their screens at the same time. Unfortunately,
I can think of a number of problems with this approach.
For one thing, the lock is only held for the duration of the transaction, so
I would have to open a Forte transaction, do the select with intent to
update, let the user modify the object, then when they saved it back again
end the transaction. Since a window is driven by the event loop I can't
think of any way to start a transaction, let the user interact with the
window, then end the transaction, short of closing and re-opening the
window. This would imply having a separate window specifically for
updating the object, and then wrapping the whole of that window's event
loop in a transaction. This would be a different interface than we wanted
to present to the users, but it might still work if not for the next issue.
The second problem is that we are using a pooled DBSession approach
to connecting to the database. There is a single Oracle login account
which none of the users know the password to, and thus the users
simply share DBSession resources. If one user starts a transaction
and does a select with intent to update on one DBSession, then another
user starts a transaction and tries to do the same thing on the same
DBSession, then the second user will get an error out of Oracle because
there's already an open transaction on that DBSession.
At this point, I am still tossing ideas around in my head, but after
speaking with our Oracle/Forte admin here, we came to the conclusion
that somebody must have had to address these issues before, so I
thought I'd toss it out and see what came back.
Thanks in advance for
any
ideas!
Dale V. Georg
Indus Consultancy Services [email protected]
Mack Trucks, Inc. [email protected]
------ Message Header Follows ------
Received: from pebble.Sagesoln.com by notes.bsginc.com
(PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.9c for Windows NT(tm))
id AA-1997Jun05.162418.1771.334203; Thu, 05 Jun 1997 16:24:19 -0500
Received: (from sync@localhost) by pebble.Sagesoln.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id
NAA11825 for forte-users-outgoing; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:47:58 -0700
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by pebble.Sagesoln.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id
NAA11819 for <[email protected]>; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:47:56 -0700
Received: from unknown(207.159.84.4) by pebble.sagesoln.com via smap (V1.3)
id sma011817; Thu Jun 5 13:47:43 1997
Received: from tes0001.macktrucks.com by relay.macktrucks.com
via smtpd (for pebble.sagesoln.com [206.80.24.108]) with SMTP; 5 Jun
1997 19:35:31 UT
Received: from dale by tes0001.macktrucks.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id QAA04637; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:45:51 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Priority: Normal
To: Forte User Group <[email protected]>
Cc: "Richards," Debbie <[email protected]>,
"Gardner," Steve <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Dale "V." Georg <[email protected]>
Subject: Transactions and Locking Rows for Update
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 97 16:48:37 PDT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: [email protected]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Dale "V." Georg <[email protected]>

How can I send a PDF form for someone to complete, then lock it for no one to see except us when they send it back?

We would like to create a PDF form to collect sensitive information (phone numbers, payment information) from our customers. Ideally, we would like for them to be able to fill it out, then hit a button to encrypt it when completed, and send it back to us for us to view. Kind of like sending out an open, self-locking box for them to fill, and once they close it no one can see the contents without the key (which we would have).
I’m using Adobe Acrobat Pro XI (11.0.07) on Mac OSX (10.9.4).
Is this possible? If so, how do I do this? Thank you in advance!

You can use certificate encryption. Each of your customers needs to have a digital certificate with a private key and send you the public key version of his/her certificate. You also need to have a digital certificate with private key and to send each customer the public version of your certificate. Then after each customer fills in your form, she encrypts it with certificate encryption entering as recipients herself and you before sending this PDF to you. This way only this particular customer and you can open and see PDF filled with sensitive information.
This workflow presumes that you and each of your customers can procure a digital certificate (Digital ID in Acrobat-speak).

How to make repricing for specific conditions at the time of billing?

Hello
I'm SD Pricing person. Let me ask here experts below my concern.
In EU countries, there is recycling fee in sales of electronics or Note PC with batteries....to keep our earth clean.
So when customers buy such products, they have to pay more as recycling fee including invoice amount.
My question is... we want to make repricing for recycling conditions when the billing is created.
Based on our configuration, recycling condition is not defined as a kind of tax condition.
So this value is just copied from sales order.
(pricing type in copy control is 'G' which means repricing for tax condition.)
In this situation, we want to make repricing for those conditions during operating system.
Is there any easy way to cover this?
As I think, this is not easy because the system is already operated.
To change condition attribution is really risky. If we dare do, we have to migrate all open orders.
So I want to put this way to the end of my choice.
For this requirement,
1. We have to change condition class or category or calculation type in order to be repriced based on pricing type 'G'.
(ex. Set the condition category as 'I' inter-billing or 'L' always repricing.)
But transaction data are created now and all open orders will be affected.
2. To create new conditions are not easy because these conditions are mapped to the CO-PA value field and the values are posted in FI doc.
3. To change pricing type in copy control is almost impossible because of the impact.
What can I do this in this situation?
What I want to do is just to make repricing for specific conditions at the time of billing in case that pricing type of copy control is 'G'.
Thank you in advance.

Let me ask agagin to all experts.
I want to make A condition to be repriced at the time of billing.
For this, I have to set condition category as 'L' (Generally new when copying).
But I do not want to do in that way becauuse I am maintaining big operated system now.
In addition, though I migrate open orders after changing config. as 'L', it is almost impossible for use to migrate because we have more than a thound open orders per a DAY as Globalized system.
That is why I am asking.
Simply I can create new condition but as I mentioned, there are various recycling fee so we already created about 10 conditions. And this recycling conditions are linked to REA package of SAP. So creating another 10 more conditions can not be a way for us.
At last, what I want is not to be shown this condition only in billing doc.
'A' condition should be displayed in both Sales order and Billing doc.
And simultaneously, when the billing is created and if user changed 'A' condition master, then new value which is different from sales order have to be reflected in billing doc.
Thank you in advance.

Is it possible to lock out a specific cookie in Safari

Is it possible to permanantly "lock out" a specific cookie in Safari? I understand using preferences to provide details and to remove specific cookies but I would like to prevent some cookies from ever being allowed. Is there an advanced blocking method I haven't found yet?

No, you are not the only one having issue with management of cookies in Safari.
Many have expressed a wish for blacklisting cookies.
Safari > Preferences > Privacy > Block cookies > Always
Click the question mark at the bottom. This is the explanation I got.
"Select to always block cookies. This may prevent you from using some websites."
I am not aware any command using terminal to accomplish the objective.
Best.

Push notifications for specific apps not working even though the badge updates (Facebook, Google etc.)

So this has been happening for months now. I was expecting iOS 5 to fix it, but it hasn't. Push notifications for specific apps do not work. Some come through just fine, but Facebook and Google+ in particular don't work correctly. Facebook push notifications seem to work when the notification is generated from an action performed on a mobile device (ie: someone writes on my wall from another iPhone); if they do the same thing on the desktop, the notification doesn't seem to come through.
As for Google+, I've never seen a single push notification come through as it should, even though I've seen other iPhones with the same app reciving these notifications with no issue.
This is particularly strange because the badge on the app icon usually updates (though it feels like fetch, not push), but the notifications simply don't make it into the notification center (or on the lock screen as they should). As I said, this has been happening for months, long before iOS 5, and the problem has persisted now that I'm running iOS 5.
I've checked and rechecked all notifiation settings for these apps. I've uninstalled and reinstalled them. I've called Apple support and they couldn't offer me any help. Does anyone have any idea what's going on here?
Thanks for your time.

I got an iPhone 4s and I'm experiencing the same problems. I used facebook messenger, and used to get the push notifications to that app, but now that i've deleted it I no longer get the messages directly to the facebook app.
I have push on in the mail settings and notification center for facebook are on as well. I also have push notifications on in the settings for facebook.
I've tried deleting the app and reinstalling, no fix. I haven't tried a hard reset yet.
So far, I figured out that it's not iOS or the facebook app, somehow it is a problem with my account. I logged into my wife's account on my iphone and her account is able to recieve push notifications to my iphone.
Any thoughts?

Automatic account clearing for cash customers sales

Is there standard SAP configuration to automatically clear an accounting document of a cash sale base on a customer payment term? Are is there is way to define all sales to specific customers as cash only sales and automatically clear sales accounting documents.
SAP ECC 6.0

Hi Nicholas,
What I can think of it is that it is like Credit card sales, where the customer outstanding is immediately cleared in the same billing document and the amount is transferred to a Cash clearing account.
Accounting entry at the time of billing :
Customer ....Dr.
Sales...........Cr.
VAT Payable..Cr.
Cash Clearing Account ..Dr.
Customer A/c...Cr
For such customers, you can have a different pricing procedure
When you account for cash in FBCJ, you can debit Cash account and credit Cash clearing account
(in case you are using FBCJ)
Alternatively, You can use a BTE( don't remember the BTE No., you can chech with ABAP), which will be automatically called in the background as soon as the billing document is posted. This would post Customer as Credit and Dr. to Cash Clearing account
In the BTE, you can write the logic that it would be triggered only for a specific customer or group of customers.
Regards,
Kavita

Help to create a monitor for specific non-windows ID generated by script

Hello all,
Do you know how to create a monitor for specific event ID (4,5,6,7 & 8) in SCOM (with alerts) I know how to create a monitor but not how to create it for specific servers. I would like to copy those monitors in the Management Pack that I override (because
the original was locked).
Thanks for your help.

Hi,
you can create new DISABLED monitor in new management pack.
After that you will enable this monitor for specific servers using overrides.

Lock quantities for specific customers

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for