QM : In-process check Hourly

Hi QM Gurus,
Pl give me  your valuable suggestions for a In-process inspection Lot in QM could be made hourly for nearly 15 set of
samples every time with 4 - 5 MIc's . Is it possible to have Hourly In-process check in QM
regards,
Bala

Hi ,
Could you please explain in case of Master recipe how the same is to be done
in recipe we will use production work centre in Phase for which MIC's assigned control key will be PI02 with
inspection charac reqd tick . In case of Inspt 150 how can I get 24 samples for each characteristics as optional entry
that is i can skip some samples if reqd . Kindly explain in detail
Regards,
jaya

Similar Messages

  • Number for bDocs processed per hour in custom interface to SAP CRM from Tibco

    Hello Experts,
    Could you please let me know the ideal Number for bDocs processed per hour for a interface which has SAP CRM and TIBCO.
    The intent is to use to most easy to scale technology for a custom interface to SAP CRM from Tibco .
    I did check the forums but was not able to get a definitive answer.
    I understand that it is not possible to quantify the exact number of BDocs that can be processed in an hour,but could you please let me know the factors on which it depends.
    Regards,
    Akash

    It depends on type of data you want to process and the size of your hardware.  My rule of thumb is that you should be able to do at least 1 BDOC per second in a worst case scenario or 3600 records for a small size system.  Keep in mind the biggest bottleneck is the database update/lookup times.  A properly sized large system, could do much more volume.  Your best bet is put in the desired transactional throughput into the SAP quicksizer and then work with your SAP hardware partner to approriately size your production box.
    If you already have hardware for production bought/existing, then find out the current SAPS rating for your hardware and then use the quicksizer to determine the target SAPS needed to meet your requirements.
    Take care,
    Stephen

  • Can I have "All spots to process" checked at all times, even for new spot colors?

    When I check “All spots to process” in the pdf export settings and save my settings the settings remember that I've checked this option. But, if new spot color objects using new spot color swatches are added to the document (or another document) and I go into the pdf export settings the check mark has been changed into a dash (with the actual checkbox highlighted) – signifying that only some of of the spot colors will be changed to process colors during export. I absolutely fail to see how this could possibly be seen as a feature and not a bug … if the user has checked “ALL spots to process” wouldn't the user expect ALL spots to be converted to process colors, rather than just any spot colors that happened to be in the document that happened to be open when the user first checked that checkbox and saved that setting?
    Am I missing something here? What's the point of even having that checkbox as part of your saved export settings if it doesn't include any other spot colors than those used when saving the settings?
    What's the point of having settings if you can't trust them, and still need to manually "override" them every time?
    I see that some users have taken to writing scripts that instead turn all spot colors in the swatch panel to process colors, and while I commend them for creating that workaround, I'm still pissed at Adobe for not getting the function right.
    If this is a feature, who is it for? People who want to add just certain spot colors and turn those into process colors rather than turning all spot colors into process colors are surely better off doing that in the swatches panel, where they're in total control of what's what. And if they don't want to "permanently" change their spot colors to process colors, and prefer to (temporarily) convert them during exporting/printing only, they can do that in the ink manager. But when someone checks convert "All spots to process" couldn't we safely assume they really want ALL spot colors to be converted and not just some of them? I mean, the way that checkbox behaves now, it's like it's a button and not a checkbox. As in: hit the button "All spots to process" to switch all currently viewed spot colors to process colors in the ink manager, OR check the "All spots to process" checkbox to always convert ALL spot colors to process colors during exporting/printing.
    Anyone got any light to shed on this?
    And is there a way to actually get the advertised behavior, because if you have to run a script every time you export/print you might as well just manually select the checkbox every time instead, but either way it's just really unnecessary as far as I'm concerned … Adobe should get the feature right instead.
    If you save a setting and recall it, it shouldn't be possible for that setting to change into something else (in this case changing a checkmark to a dash).
    Clearly CMYK printing is the norm, so for most users it would make a lot of sense to have the "All spots to process" checked most of the time, and then you just go into the swatches panel or the ink manager and set things correctly for those print jobs that really do need spot colors.
    I myself am not one of those who add spot colors to my swatches unless I'm really using them as spot colors, but I often work with magazines and folders featuring adverts made by whoever, and typically there's always at least one advert that features spot colors, and therefore it would be very nice if the "All spots to process" feature actually worked as advertised without any required actions from me.
    We stopped sending ads back to the advertisers for adjustments a long time ago, unless we absolutely had to, because there were so many things wrong with so many ads that it was simply too much work to write back and explain everything to people who most of the time didn't even understand what we were talking about. We found that it was usually a LOT faster and easier to just adapt the ads ourselves, as long as it was something that could be worked out really quickly from within InDesign itself, which pretty much included most typical errors.
    But with this feature I find Adobe is trying to make my job harder rather than easier, and it's pissing me off. Arrrghh… ;-)

    But It's not a preference it's a shortcut
    It's a bad joke, is what it is. ;-)
    So, why in your opinion should it be presented the way it is? I keep saying in it's current functionality it shouldn't be presented the way it is (and that: if it is, it shouldn't work the way it does). If it's not a preference or even a proper checkbox, why present it that way?
    If you put it right next to the table at the top of the window (so that it's directly associated with that information, rather than information right above it) and just called the checkbox “Spot(s) to process” and had it only visually reflect the content of the sleected spot colors in the table, then I'd see your point with likening it to the “Hyphenate” checkbox.
    If a story has two selected paragraphs that uses two different hyphenation settings then the checkbox should present the way it does now, but if you hit the checkbox so that both paragraphs now use hyphenation and create a third paragraph inbetween the two previous ones it better inherit that setting and not turn off hyphenation for the new paragraph (unless of course there's a defined next paragraph style that switches to a style with hyphenation turned off). And if that checkbox said “Hyphenate all paragraphs” instead, then I would expect it to do just that, and not just the selected ones, and not just the current paragraphs but quite literally all paragraphs even newly created ones – otherwise it doesn't do what it says it does, and simply shouldn't be labeled that way.
    And seriously bad interface design aside, you'd have to rename “All spots to process” to “Switch all currently displayed spot swatches listed in the table above to process” to actually describe what that checkbox does. So even if you're a fan of the current functionality, as opposed to one that actually lets the user set and forget a setting like that, and think it's better that users manually check it repeatedly (which I'm not saying that you are, but you're not giving me any feedback suggesting you even see my point of view with any of this, so what do I know?), then why wouldn't you still support an interface that visually matches/signals that functionality better? If it's a “Select all” checkbox supplementing a table containing a column of checkboxes, then present it that way. Don't put it at the bottom of the window next to another checkbox that works just like a regular checkbox and label it “All spots to process” – because that way you are signalling a different behavior.
    Seriously, if I was to do design using the same mentality that Adobe uses when designing their user interfaces it wouldn't be long before I lost all clients. There's a lot to be said for de facto monopolies, I suppose. Oh no, there's nothing wrong with the design, just as long as you accept it on it's own terms and don't compare it to anything relevant, and just as long as you give people enough time to understand and accept it … and surrender to it.
    For real … I wouldn't win one single pitch that way.
    Today's threads have in many ways been a thorough reminder of the following quote from the second link I provided:
    Is there an Internet rule yet stating that even the most obviously indefensible mistake will eventually be defended by someone somewhere? Awful marketing efforts get explained as genius viral campaigns, broken features become solutions.
    And whether or not you're able to see my point of view or not is really besides the point too.
    The real point was, and remains to be:
    That for those who receive lots of ads or other external files that may or may not contain spot colors it would be far more useful to be able to set a checkbox to always convert all spots to process when exporting, than the current functionality is (and I'm not suggesting eliminating the current functionality, just change so it's presented like what it really is, and then just let that separate checkbox do what it says) … causing unnecessary manual action on the user's behalf shouldn't be the business of Adobe – preventing it should.
    And here's further reading on the subject of bad Adobe interface design for those who might feel so inclined. ;-)
    Cheers!

  • TS4057 I did this and now my videos are not working. They show the pictures aren't there on some and on others it shows they are there, but doesn't show them in the player. When I try to Share anything it just says Waiting for Processing for hours. What d

    I did this and now my videos are not working. They show the pictures aren't there on some and on others it shows they are there, but doesn't show them in the player. When I try to Share anything it just says Waiting for Processing for hours. What do I do?
    I also got Motion and can't figure out how to use it with Final Cut Pro X. Any help woud be great. Thanks

    I have no idea what may have caused your MacBook to stop working, but from your description it kind of sounds like it may have started before you ran Software Update and installed the new Apps. Just the general slow feeling and bugginess is what tips me off. You said that you weren't sure if you had closed all open windows, that doesn't matter if the computer restarts itself. It automatically closes all other open applications when restarting.
    As to your data being retrievable, if when you take it in they do a fresh install of the OS, then no, it will not be unless you want to pay several thousand dollars to a software retrieval company.
    I am glad to hear that you have taken into the Apple Store to get it fixed, and that you have all of your purchased music backed up to your iPod. You should be able to just transfer it all back to iTunes once you get your computer back should it be necessary.
    As a side note, the proper place for this topic would probably in the MacBook forums, not iTunes since there is no evidence that iTunes started the issue.

  • Business process check-in/check-out - who has checked out and when?

    We have been using the business process check-in/check-out functionality for 18 months and there are an increasing number of process's that have been checked out to the maintenance project and never checked in again. Is there a straight forward way in the system to see who had checked out a business process and when? When using the SOLMAN_DIRECTORY transaction it is easy to see which process's are checked out as they are marked the red OUT symbol and have check-out status = checked out - but no other information about the check-out seems to be available either in this transaction or on a separate report.

    Hello Steve,
    What Peter neglected to tell you is once you enable history on the Solution a history log will begin to populate.
    It will show as the standard "Log" icon for HISTORY. Every change will be logged at each level of the structure.
    Here is an example of a History log line....while it is not a check-in.out change it will give you an idea
    Name             Date             Time              Change                               Object                           Old Value           New Value
    I809573     24.01.2011     22:33:32     Process Availability     Material Management          7 x 24 h
    What you can do is filter the report on the values that will give you the check-in/check out against the objects you want to track.
    This is how you can use the "Enable History" to get the information you are interested it.
    Just two things to be aware of : 1) The history will not be retro active (unless it was already enabled), so it will start from the day you enable logging (history), and logs take up space, which at some point maintenance will likely be required, however I don't see these logs having high disk usuage.
    If it were documents that you wanted a report on check-in/check-out for, you likely could use the transaction Solar_Eval under Documents, but there are no standard reports for this...and filtering the History log file accordingly is about the best reporting
    that would give a result. This log file can be printed, or you could capture the printoutput to a file and there is your Electronic version of the report.
    I hope this has helped.
    Regards,
    Paul

  • Solution Directory--Business process --Check in /Out option

    Dear Friends,
       I am working in Solution directory (t.code: DSWP). I have created one maintenance project. In this maintenance project i have maintained the following business process.
    1. Sale Order Processing
    2. Production Order Processing.
    These two business processes are currently running in my R/3 production process.
    In SOLAR01 , "admin" tab i have assigned project team member as "ZSRAGHU" for business process 'Sale Order Processing"
    Like the same way, for business process "Production order Processing" i have assigned the project team member as "ZSRAO".
    In SOLAR_PROJECT_ADMIN t.code, i have checked in the box "Restrict changes to nodes in project to assigned team members" so that only assigned team member can edit the business process.
    Now i have assigned this maintenance project to my Solution. (The name of my Solution is "TEST")
    As per the help.sap.com document, if the business process has been "checked Out" from Solution directory by the project lead, then only the team mmeber can edit the process in SOLR01.
    Am i right?
    But in my system, the team members are possible to edit the business process (In SOLAR01..."Structure" tab) before the business process are being "Checked Out" from Solution directory.
    I want to restrict this option to my team members.
    My requirement is:
    If the Business process been "Checked out" in Solution, then only the team member can able to edit the business process in SOLAR01 otherwise i can not preserve my production business process....
    Please guide me to achive this & will be very much rewarded.
    Note:
    In "SOLAR_PROJECT_ADMIN" under "Scope" tab, check in the box "Edit structures" will NOT help to map this requirement as all aware.
    Regards
    Senthil

    Dear Senthil,
    By Business Process 'Check Out', I hope you are talking of the 'Document' attached at Process level and not the Process itself, as in the structure.
    I can understand your frustration about the indicator "Restrict changes to nodes in project to assigned team members" not working.
    As mentioned in the online help, did you try to work your way through Authorisation Object "AI_SA_TAB" ?
    Is it due to some other authorisation that users have, which 'supersedes' this authorisation object ? Did you check any SAP Note for this object ?
    If nothing else works, can you try to introduce a 'Custom Status' and use the following IMG setting to restrict it by users:
    SAP Solution Manager -> Configuration -> Scenario-Specific Settings -> Cross-scenario Settings -> Document Management -> Status for Documents -> Assign Status Values for Read Authorisation
    This may be a workaround !
    Regards,
    Srini

  • Maximum messages processed per hour ?

    Hi Experts,
    I read a XI doc on Sizing SAP XI (ref. Sizing SAP
    Exchange Infrastructure 3.0 - Version 1.1 - July 2004)
    Examples are given with maximum of 108,000 message processed per hours : Is - it an unbreakable limit ?
    A client wants to integrate each quarter about 5,000,000 documents per day during a long week.
    Does XI can support such huge numbers of simple messages (no BPM, simple mapping, file-to-file scenario) ?.
    Thanks a lot for your response.
    Etienne

    Hi Etienne,
    I had a Scenerio sending around 10 MB file from one interface, When we had XSLT mapping we had issue consuming  lot of memory, When we  made a simple mapping able to get desired result with time and later stage we decided to break the messages  and  send it. It was successfull,
    Pls go thru these links, it will give some idea
    topic #3.42
    https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/70ada5ef-0201-0010-1f8b-c935e444b0ad#search=%22XI%20sizing%20guide%22
    /people/sap.user72/blog/2004/11/28/how-robust-is-sap-exchange-infrastructure-xi
    A discussion it will be useful,
    File Adpater: Size of your processed messages
    Thanks & Regards
    Agasthuri Doss

  • Error reads as "no stock in returns, line has been processed check mb51"

    Hello Experts,
    I am getting an error "no stock in returns, line has been processed check mb51" while processing the returns delivery and no material document exists in MB51 after PGI. Can anyone suggest whats missing or wrong ? 
    regards, sunny

    Hi,
    Go to VL02N and check the Goods Movement Status for the Delivery under "Status" Tab. It should be C i.e. Completed. If it is not then PGI has not been done for the delivery so first do PGI and then try for Returns.

  • How to process check box in classical ALV

    Hi,
    I have one requirement wherein I am using  Reuse_ALV_GRID_DISPLAY..I have a checkbox as a field and I have a push button as UPDATE...
    If I select the rows in the ALV list using checkbox and if i click  the Update button, I have to continue processing based on the checked rows..how will i capture the rows which are selected in ALV list...
    Thanks in Adavance,
    Saranya.

    Hi Saranya
    Plz try the following logic.
    " Display data on the screen
    " Alternative to it u can display the data usign REUSE_ALV_LIST_DISPLAY  
    " FM as well
    Data : len type i .
    loop at itab.     "  contains data to b displayed
      write : / a as checkbox,itab-<f1>,itab-<f2>,...........,itab-<fn>.
    endloop.
    describe table itab lines len.
    at line-selection.
      do len times.
        read line sy-index  field value a itab-<f1>,  itab-<f2>,...........,itab-<fn>.
        if a = 'X'.
          write : /5  itab-<f1>,  itab-<f2>,...........,itab-<fn>.
        endif.
      enddo.
    Plz try this and revert in case of issues .
    Regards
    Pankaj

  • Confirm end of processing check box in task

    Hi,
    In my workflow used fork with 2 parallel branches.
    In one branch is a dialog activity step ( sending doc to incorportaors for review -  checked the confirm end of processing checkbox in the task )
    and in the other branch is a 'Wait for Event' step ( wait for rejection - when status getting changes to 32).
    when executing dialog activity with confirm end of processing,branch 1 wait step workitem is getting completed and branch 2 workitem is logically getting deleted and further step in the workflow is not executed in branch 2.
    Same changes I am trying to do without confirm end of processing pop up.When I uncheck the check box and execute the dialog activity, branch 1 wait step workitem is getting completed and branch 2 workitem is also getting completed ( instead logically getting deleted ) and further step in the workflow is executed in branch 2. I dont want the remaining step to get executed.
    Please let me know how to achieve this. I tried with some function module but its not working.
    In the attached file, I have shown the screenshot where it is going wrong.
    Thanks & Regards,
    Priya

    Hi Priya
    Both steps (in both branches) are getting executed by the same activity by the user. Yes, it's a race as correctly mentioned by Mike
    As mentioned by Prakash, either you need to restrict REJECTION event creation or you can try an approach mentioned in the following thread:
    Re: TRIP Workflow approval issue
    You can refer to my response in the above thread:
    Dated: Feb 26, 2014 (10:25AM) and Feb 26, 2014 (12:59PM)
    Regards,
    Modak

  • Is it odd that the back-up/retreival process takes  hours on my iphone4 or am I doing something wrong?

    I need help understanding how the icloud back-up/retreival process works and how to use it at maximum efficiency

    Welcome to the Apple community.
    You must remember, that whilst you see Internet speeds quoted as say 8, 12, 16, 30 Mb per second etc, this refers to download speed. most service providers will give you around 1 Mb per second as upload speed. At these speeds a gigabyte of information will take around about 2 1/4 hours to upload.
    So in answer to your question, no I don't think you are doing anything wrong.

  • 'All spots to process' Checked automatically. Please help

    Hi,
    I recently sent a job to print which was supposed to have 1 spot colour. It came back from the printer 4-colour with no spot and when I ckecked the artwork 'All spots to process' was checked in the Ink Manager.
    I definitely did not check the box as I wasn't even aware of it and previous versions of the document show it was un-checked.
    Is it possible to turn this feature on by default/automatically/by accident!? Could I have activated it elsewhere in InDesign?
    Thanks
    Ian

    Hi lan,
    Me also faced same problem i think this will be helpful to you
    Just run the script before exporting the pdf file all spot colors will coverts as a CMYK
    Say BIG "thank you" to Jongware. This is his script
    app.activeDocument.colors.everyItem().properties = {space:ColorSpace.CMYK, model:ColorModel.PROCESS};
    For more details see below link
    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/732362?tstart=0
    Regards,
    Siva

  • Table for Sales Order - Output Type - Processing Check

    Hi all,
    We have around 300 Sales Order, where we need to check weather Sales Order Acknowledgement (Custom) Output Type is processed or not?
    With the help of condition record setup we beleive all the Sales Order have got the output type assigned, but we need to know, is there any way from any SAP table, we can check the output is processed or not.
    Also, let me know is there any way some table can we check, all the sales order have got the output type assigned?
    <Text removed by Moderator. Priority normalized.> Please help.
    Thanks
    RS

    You can use Table NAST.
    Field
    Field Desc
    Reference
    KAPPL
    Application
    Application type
    V1 - Sales
    V2 - Shipping
    V3 - Billing
    OBJKY
    Object key
    Sales Order - Header Output
    Sales Order + Item - Item Output
    KSCHL
    Message type
    Output Type
    PARNR
    Partner
    Customer Number
    PARVW
    Partner Role
    Partner Function - SP
    NACHA
    Transm. Medium
    MANUE
    Msg. manually
    DATVR
    Processing date
    UHRVR
    Processing time
    USNAM
    User name
    VSTAT
    Processing status
    LDEST
    Output Device
    TCODE
    Communication strategy
    OBJTYPE
    Object type
    BUS2032 - Sales Order
    LIKP\LIPS - Delivery-Header\Item
    VBRK\VBRP - Billing-Header\Item
    Thanks, JP

  • "Your payment is processing" for hours??

    Howdy--I'm a student trying to buy a year subscription to Creative Suite and was stuck on the payment processing page for what seemed like hours with no resolution. I don't want to get double billed but am unclear if I'm good to go--is there a confirmation email??--or if I need to resubmit payment--eek!--or what. Thanks for your help/input.

    Rajshree,
    I wish that were true. 
    In fact, it is not.  Now almost twenty hours after paying I cannot use my order.  I am close to canceling it and asking for a full refund. 
    Your "order history" pages take forever to load.  When they do finally load  the "download" link does not work.  It goes to the following:
    413
    Header Length too Large
    Adobe should do itself and its users (and potential users) a favor: simplify and redesign your website.  Or hire someone who can. 
    This level of delay and these problems are simply unacceptable.  And I will certainly not consider your ongoing subscription (which your site continues to push above all else) when a simple online order is this screwed up.
    JD

  • How to check hourly backups

    I have a Time Capsule. Having a bit of trouble checking that itis working ok. i don't have great internet connection so have moved imac close to time capsule so i can connect by ethernet.
    i can only find the daily backups. where casn i check for hourly backups.?
    thanks

    If the iMac is active, it will check each hour to see if it needs to backup anything that occurred in the last hour or so. If you have not added anything new, the iMac will skip the backup....since there is nothing new to back up.
    Backups will not occur if the iMac is inactive or is "sleeping".
    The iMac will not back up each hour unless you have been actively using the iMac for the past hour or so. Just having it on is not actively using it.
    The fact that you have daily backups confirms that the Mac is backing up corrrectly, since the daily backup consolidates all the "hourly" backups from the previous day. Relax.

Maybe you are looking for