Reg: consistency check in recordset structure validation

Hi all,
I am doing FCC to FCC scenario, i am getting this error. Help me out, it is very urgent for me.
Sender Adapter v2723 for Party '', Service 'bs_text2text':
Configured at 2007-08-21 08:00:49 UTC
History:
- 2007-08-21 09:29:06 UTC: Retry interval started. Length: 2.000 s
- 2007-08-21 09:29:06 UTC: Error: Conversion of complete file content to XML format failed around position 0: Exception: ERROR consistency check in recordset structure validation (line no. 87: missing structure(s) in last recordset
- 2007-08-21 09:29:06 UTC: Processing started
- 2007-08-21 09:29:04 UTC: Error: Conversion of complete file content to XML format failed around position 0: Exception: ERROR consistency check in recordset structure validation (line no. 87: missing structure(s) in last recordset
- 2007-08-21 09:29:04 UTC: Processing started
Regards,
Ajay.

Hi Ajay,
Problem with the file content conversion parameters you specified in the sender file adapter.
Do let us know your DT structure and FCC parameters specified in adapter.
Regards,
Sumit

Similar Messages

ERROR consistency check in recordset structure validation

Hi,
I have a file that has the format below. The file is managed with the below content conversion parameters. However, it's not working and the error message that i get is "Conversion of file content to XML failed at position 0: java.lang.Exception: ERROR consistency check in recordset structure validation (line no. 7: missing structure(s) in last recordset". Any idea, what when wrong? Thanks.
Message Type defined:
FileHeader            (occurrence = 1)
ARPostingRecord    (occurrence = 1 to unbounded)
    RecordHeader       (occurrence = 1 to unbounded)
    RecordDetail          (occurrence = 1 to unbounded)
Source file looks like this:
01 Field1 Field2...Field-n
H Field1 Field2...Field-n
L Field1 Field2...Field-n
L Field1 Field2...Field-n
H Field1 Field2...Field-n
L Field1 Field2...Field-n
L Field1 Field2...Field-n
where:
01 is the keyfieldvalue for FileHeader
H is the keyfieldvalue for RecordHeader
L is the keyfieldvalue for RecordDetail
Specified parameters:
FileHeader.fieldSeparator
FileHeader.endSeparator
FileHeader.fieldNames
FileHeader.keyFieldValue
RecordHeader.fieldSeparator
RecordHeader.endSeparator
RecordHeader.fieldNames
RecordHeader.keyFieldValue
RecordHeader.missingLastFields
RecordHeader.keepIncompleteFields
RecordDetail.fieldSeparator
RecordDetail.endSeparator
RecordDetail.fieldNames
RecordDetail.keyFieldValue
RecordDetail.missingLastFields
RecordDetail.keepIncompleteFields
ignoreRecordsetName
Recordset Name:
ARPostingRecord
Recordset Structure:
FileHeader,1,RecordHeader,1000000,RecordDetail,1000000

>ERROR consistency check in recordset structure validation (line no. 7: missing structure(s) in last recordset". Any idea, what when wrong?
When you are not sure about number of records for RecordHeader and RecordDetail, Please specify wildchar character. Dont give max numbers. The errors says expecting the specified number for recordset and since it is missing gives errror.

ERROR consistency check in recordset structure

Hello All,
Below is my input file format looks like:
HEADER
REC_1
REC_1
REC_1
REC_2
FOOTER
And I have defined the Recordset structure as HEADER,1,REC_1,*,REC_2,*,FOOTER,1.But the occurence of REC_2 is optional (0 to Unbounded).
Conversion of file content to XML failed at
position 0: java.lang.Exception: ERROR consistency check in recordset structure
validation (line no. 4: missing structure(s) before type 'HEADER'
It looks like the error is due to missing REC_2 segment in the input file.
Can you please tell me how to handle this in FCC
Thanks,

Hi Naresh
IMHO, I don't think that the error is due to missing REC_2 in the input file.
From SAP library, * includes also 0 occurence.
Converting Text Format in the Sender File/FTP Adapter to XML - Configuring the File/FTP Adapter in Integration Directory…
Under Recordset Structure, enter the sequence and the number of substructures as follows:<NameA,nA,NameB,nB,...>, where nA=1,2,3,... or * (for a variable, unlimited number, including 0).
Please provide screenshot of your FCC configuration and also sample input file that is causing the error so that it can be analysed further.
Rgds
Eng Swee

Consistency check error in sender file content conversion

Dear Experts,
I am trying one simple File to File scenario in which i have only fields 1>salesorder_number 2>Description
I created a txt file with line items "100,crudeoil" with file name as salesorder.txt
In the sender file adapter i have configured the file convertion paramenters as follows:
Document name : mt_salesorder_sender
Document namespace : http://se.com.sa/sec-sa-qax "Namespace of message type
Recordset Structure : document,*
document.endSeparator : 'nl'
document.fieldSeparator: ,
document.fieldNames : salesorder_number,Description
So after this if i run the scenario In file adapter i am getting the error like "Conversion initialization failed: java.lang.Exception: java.lang.Exception: java.lang.Exception: Error(s) in XML conversion parameters found: Parameter 'document.fieldFixedLengths' or 'document.fieldSeparator' is missing Consistency check: no. of arguments in 'document.fieldFixedLength' does not match 'document.fieldNames' (0 <> 2) "
Please let me know where i am going wrong.
Regards,
Santhosh

Hi,
please maintain the order as
Recordset Structure : document,*
document.fieldNames : salesorder_number,Description
document.fieldSeparator: ,
document.endSeparator : 'nl'
Rgds
joel

Sender FTP: FCC Missing Consistency check: no. of arguments does not match

Hi well my Input i as follows:
7283167S500481000000001789098
whereas my FCC in Sender-CC FTP is like:
RecordSet-Name: BestfileRecordSet
PecordSetStructure: BestFileHeader,,BestFilePos,
Recordsets per Mesage: *
KeyfieldName: BDART
BestFileHeader.fieldNames=BDKDNR,BDDSKNR,BDART
BestFileHeader.fieldFixedLenghts=4,3,1
BestFileHeader.endSeparator= 'nl'
BestFileHeader.processFieldNames= fromConfiguration
BestFileHeader.keyFieldValue=T
BestFilePos.fieldNames= BDART,BDIDENT,BDMENGE,BDFREMD
BestFilePos.fieldFixedLenghts= 1,8,7,10
BestFilePos.endSeparator= 'nl'
BestFilePos.processFieldNames= fromConfiguration
BestFilePos.keyFieldValue = S
BestfileRecordSet.endSeparator='nl'
In CC-Monitoring i get:
java.lang.Exception: java.lang.Exception: java.lang.Exception: Error(s) in XML conversion parameters found: Parameter 'BestFileHeader.fieldFixedLengths' or 'BestFileHeader.fieldSeparator' is missing Consistency check: no. of arguments in 'BestFileHeader.fieldFixedLength' does not match 'BestFileHeader.fieldNames' (0 <> 3)
so what is wrong?! Can sb help me?!
br Jens

Hi Guru, i would appreciate your help. Well the data in input-structure looks like:
7283167TCARTON
7283167T
7283167S014800000000010
7283167S015823030000004
7283167S016352100000040
7283167S016792020000007
7283167S016793020000007
7283167S031502020000010
etc.
Problem is also that instead of T (header) and S (Position) there might be L,D (also for Position). Therefore i have no clue how to handle these values as keyfieldValues.
some ideas?! br Jens

LiveCache Consistency Check question, OM17

I have a general question about a LiveCache Consistency Check (transaction OM17). I know that it is a data inconsistency b/w the SAP APO database and SAP APO LiveCache. But what does that mean to a functional user? Can someone explain this in layman's terms?

In Layman terms, you can say that this checks the INCONSISTENCY between LiveCache and Database.
Here is a detailed documentation on each of the Object Types
Consistency Check for Setup Matrices
The consistency check for setup matrices contains:
· A check whether the setup matrices exist in liveCache
· A check whether the setup transitions exist in liveCache
· A field comparison between the setup transitions in the database and those in liveCache
When the setup matrices are corrected, the setup matrices in liveCache are completely generated from those in the database. Previously nonexistent setup matrices and setup transitions are newly created in liveCache. Superfluous setup transitions are deleted from liveCache. Setup transitions that differ at the field level are adjusted to match the database status.
Consistency Comparison for Block Basis Definitions
Use
When you set this indicator, checks are performed in liveCache and in the database on characteristic values for block basis definitions:
· The existence of block basis definitions is checked.
· The consistency of the characteristic values is checked.
After the checks you can call a correction function in the check results display. When correcting the error, the system deletes obsolete block basis definitions in liveCache. The system completes or corrects missing or inconsistent block basis definitions in liveCache.
Note
The check is performed independently of the planning version.
Consistency Check for Resources
The consistency check for resources contains:
· A check that the resource and corresponding time stream exist in liveCache
· An check that a resource's characteristic blocks exist in liveCache
· A field comparison between the database resource and the liveCache resource
When correcting the resources, the resources in liveCache are completely generated from the database resources. Previously nonexistent resources are created in liveCache.
Consistency check for downtimes caused by maintenance order
The consistency check for maintenance downtimes contains:
A check that the maintenance downtime has a reference to an existing maintenance order.
A check that the dates of maintenance downtime correspond to the exisiting maintenance order.
When correcting the maintenance downtime errors, downtimes without maintenance order are deleted and wrong dates of downtimes are corrected in relation to the maintenance order.
Consistency Check for Product Location Combinations
Use
If you set this indicator the system executes a consistency check for product location combinations. The consistency check for product location combinations includes:
· A check for the existence of a product location combination in the database and in liveCache
· A field comparison between product location combinations in the database and in liveCache
· The determination of obsolete entries for product location combinations in the database
· A check for the existence of characteristic value assignments for product location combinations in the database and in liveCache
· A field comparison of characteristic value assignments for product location combinations in the database and in liveCache
After the check you can call a correction function from the display of check results. For the correction, the system deletes obsolete product location combinations from the database and in liveCache. The system corrects inconsistent product location combinations and characteristic value assignments for product location combinations in liveCache.
Consistency Check for Stocks
Use
If you set this indicator the system executes a consistency check for stocks. The consistency check for stocks includes:
· A check for the existence of a stock in the database and in liveCache
· A field comparison between stocks in the database and in liveCache
· The determination of obsolete entries for stocks in the database
· A check for the existence of characteristic value assignments in the database and in liveCache
· A field comparison between characteristic value assignments for batch stocks in the database and in liveCache
After the check, you can call a correction function from the display of check results. For the correction, the system attempts to correct inconsistent stocks in the database and in liveCache. If a correction is not possible, the stocks are deleted in the database and in liveCache. The system corrects characteristic value assignments for batch stocks in liveCache.
After inconsistent stocks have been corrected, it may be necessary to start the delta report in order to reconcile SAP APO and SAP R/3.
Consistency Comparison of Configuration/CDP for Orders
Use
When you set this indicator, the system performs a consistency check with regard to configuration or CDP (characteristic value assignments/ requirements) for receipts/requirements belonging to orders:
· In the case of products with variant configuration and product variants, the system checks whether there is a referenced configuration in the database.
· In the case of products with CDP, the system checks whether CDP characteristics exist.
Note
In the area Restrictions, you can use the indicator CDP: Detailed Check to define a detailed check for CDP characteristics. If you set this indicator, the CDP data used for the orders is also compared with the product master.
· For products without configuration/CDP, the system checks whether invalid references to variant configuration or invalid CDP characteristics data exist.
After the check, you can call a correction function in the check results display. When executing the correction, the system tries to adjust inconsistent orders in liveCache.
After inconsistent orders have been corrected, you may need to start the delta report to compare the SAP R/3 system and SAP APO again.
Dependencies
The consistency check for configuration or CDP data is very time-consuming. You should therefore limit the comparison as far as possible to certain products or locations.
Consistency Check for Production Campaigns
If orders are assigned to production campaigns that do not exist in the database, this leads to inconsistent campaigns.
You can correct inconsistent production campaigns by removing all orders from them. That means that the campaign assignments are removed from the orders in liveCache.
Consistency Check for Operations
In the database table of /SAPAPO/OPR operations, there may exist operations that have no orders in liveCache, no orders for a simulation version, orders for deleted simulation versions, or no external operation number. These operations place an unnecessary load on the database table and can hinder system performance.
Consistency Check for Planning Matrices
As planning matrices are not master data, they are only located in liveCache. For each production version, there is a record in the database with information about matrices that must exist for this production version and whether the last matrix explosion was successful.
The consistency check for planning matrices checks:
· Whether the matrices associated with each record on the database exist in liveCache
· Whether the records associated with all the matrices in liveCache exist on the database
· Whether the last matrix explosion was successful.
If inconsistencies are discovered, they can be corrected. As corrections are made by recalculating the inconsistent matrices, the process can take a while and should only be done for large matrices (with many orders or many item variants) at times when it can be guaranteed not to hinder any other system processes.
Consistency Check for Simulation Versions
This is a check for whether simulation versions exist in liveCache.
Correction does not take place automatically. Simulation versions that still exist in the database but no longer exist in liveCache do not influence the running of the system. If necessary, they can be deleted using transaction /SAPAPO/CDPSS0.
Consistency Check for Product Allocations
The consistency check for product allocations checks the data for product allocation assignment from the database and compares this with the incoming orders quantity in Demand Planning. Surpluses or shortages are displayed and can be corrected.
The reconcile is only executed for product allocation groups with a direct connection to the product allocation group in the planning area if the connection is also fully defined.
There may be long runtimes during the consistency check due to the data structure. The following factors can hinder performance:
· Number of characteristics combinations
· Number of periods in a time series
· Number of sales orders that take product allocations from a time stream
Error in the reconcile
If it is not possible to reconcile the incoming orders quantity, the data records are issued again with a relevant error message. Check the following causes and attempt again.
Check:
· If the planning area to be checked is locked
· If the time streams are initialized (after liveCache has been initialized)
· If all characteristics combinations area available in the planning area
· The wildcard indicator for collective product allocation
· The settings for your planning area
Due Delivery Schedules/Confirmations Consistency Check
When a scheduling agreement release is received from a customer for sales and distribution scheduling agreement items, a due delivery schedule is created and stored in liveCache. As soon as a confirmation for a due delivery schedule containing at least one schedule line with a quantity larger than zero is generated, an object is also created for it in liveCache. The transaction data for sales and distribution scheduling agreement items contains, amongst other things, an entry with the key of the due delivery schedule object currently located in liveCache and an entry with the key of the confirmation that is currently valid in the database. During the check, the system checks whether liveCache objects exist for sales and distribution scheduling agreement items and whether the transaction data entries are correct.
The following individual checks are made for active sales and distribution scheduling agreement items:
· Is there an operative scheduling agreement release and/or forecast/planning delivery schedule in the database, but no associated liveCache object?
· Is there a confirmation in the database, but no associated liveCache object?
· Is there a due delivery schedule in liveCache, without at least one existing operative scheduling agreement release and/or forecast/planning delivery schedule?
· Is there a confirmation in liveCache, without an existing confirmation in the database?
· Is the key in the transaction data in the database that shows the current due delivery schedule in liveCache, also that of the actual liveCache object?
· Is there actually a confirmation in the database for the key in the transaction data that shows the currently valid confirmation in the database?
If a sales and distribution scheduling agreement item is inactive, there are not allowed to be any due delivery schedules or confirmations in liveCache. In this case, the following checks are made:
· Is there a due delivery schedule in liveCache for an inactive sales and distribution scheduling agreement item?
· Is there a confirmation in liveCache for an inactive sales and distribution scheduling agreement item?
Consistency Check for Production Backflushes
Partially confirmed orders cannot be deleted from liveCache. For each partially confirmed order of the database table, there must be a corresponding order in liveCache. If no order exists, there is a data inconsistency that can only be rectified by deleting the order from the database tables of the confirmation.
Entries for orders that have already been confirmed exist in the status matrix. The entry in an order's status matrix is deleted when the confirmed order is deleted by the /SAPAPO/PPC_ORD archiving report. Each status matrix entry for which database tables of the confirmation do not exist, present an inconsistency that can only be removed by deleting the status matrix entry.
Consistency Check for iPPE Objects
The iPPE object is not an iPPE master data structure. It is a data extract that is generated for each iPPE access object.
The consistency check for the object checks that it exists in liveCache and also determines its identity using the backup copy in the database. When correcting the object, the copy from the database is written to liveCache.
It is necessary to check the object if the following error message occurs: 'Error while calling COM routines via application program' (/sapapo/om 102) with return code 1601, 1602, or 1603. This does not apply to liveCache initialization.
Consistency Check for Procurement Scheduling Agreement Items
The following three objects represent procurement scheduling agreement items (scheduling agreement in short):
1. Scheduling agreement schedule lines
2. Release schedule lines
3. Confirmations
All these objects are located in liveCache. Release schedule lines and confirmations are also located in the database with a historical record. Depending on the process that was set up for the scheduling agreement, not all objects exist in liveCache or have historical records.
If goods movements exist for an object, there must always be at least one entry in liveCache. If all schedule lines are covered by goods receipts, at least one schedule line will exist in liveCache with the number '0000000000' and an open quantity of 0.
A liveCache crash, operator errors, and program errors can all cause inconsistencies. Below is a list of all the inconsistent statuses that have been identified and that can be removed:
1. The object is not in liveCache but goods receipts exist.
2. The number of input nodes and output nodes is different.
3. There are no input nodes at the order, but the material exists in the source location for the order.
4. The original quantity at the source of an order is different from that at the destination.
5. The accumulated quantities in liveCache are different from those in the database (the cumulative received quantity, for example).
6. The set process is compared with the status in liveCache.
7. A check is made to see whether the scheduling agreement is being planned in APO or in R/3 and whether the schedule lines have the appropriate specification.
If a schedule line inconsistency is identified, no more checks for inconsistencies are made, instead it moves on to the next schedule line.
Consistency Check for MSP Orders
Provides a list of maintenance and slot orders that
·     Exist in the database but have no corresponding orders in the liveCache
·     Exist in the liveCache, but have no corresponding orders in the database
Procedure
From within the list, you can either
·     Correct the inconsistencies
If you choose to do this, the system deletes the selected orders from the database and/or liveCache.
You receive a message that the selected order(s) have been deleted.
·     Leave the inconsistencies in the database and/or liveCache
Such inconsistencies place an unnecessary load on the database and/or liveCache. Moreover, those orders that exist in the liveCache, but have no corresponding orders in the database, influence the scheduling results of subsequent orders in the liveCache
Hope this helps
Regards
Kumar Ayyagari

RecordSet Structure Sequence Variable in JMS like in File Adapter

Hi all,
We are having some problems trying to find how to implement the functionality of the variable recordset structure in a JMS adapter.
We do have a structure with this form:
HR - data
AR - data
AR - data
HR - data
The two first chars are the keyfield, and our comm channel is just ignoring the second occurence of the Header (HR).
In a File adapter, we would use the Recordset Sequence = Variable parameter but, is there anything similar for the JMS adapter?
Thanks in advance, Iñaki.

Hi Kamesh,
I believe it's a namespace issue, pls check namespace of your consumed message and one used in your transformation..should match.
Test your xslt separately (by including correct namespaces,especially in tag <element1> ... source in ur xslt)
Thanks,
Faiz

Errors occur during executing consistency checks

Hi all,
During my phase"executing consistency checks", errors occur :
X_STXH| Sender structure S_STXB is not assigned to the receiver structure R_STXB.
It happened in PC001_PCL_CHECK sub-activity.
The details as follows:
ubactivity PC001_PCL_CHECK was started on 08.03.2009 at 22:10:02 by user LEEE03 | |
Check COBJ started at 08.03.2009 22:10:30 by LEEE03
Check COBJ finished at 08.03.2009 22:11:04 by LEEE03
Check HIER started at 08.03.2009 22:11:04 by LEEE03
Check HIER finished at 08.03.2009 22:11:04 by LEEE03
Check RELS started at 08.03.2009 22:11:04 by LEEE03
X_STXH
Sender structure S_STXB is not assigned to the receiver structure R_STXB
X_STXH
Sender structure S_STXB is not assigned to the receiver structure R_STXB
X_STXH
Sender structure S_STXB is not assigned to the receiver structure R_STXB
X_STXH
Sender structure S_STXL is not assigned to the receiver structure R_STXL
X_STXH
Sender structure S_STXL is not assigned to the receiver structure R_STXL
X_STXH
Sender structure S_STXL is not assigned to the receiver structure R_STXL
Check RELS finished at 08.03.2009 22:11:20 by LEEE03
Check RULE started at 08.03.2009 22:11:20 by LEEE03
Check RULE finished at 08.03.2009 22:11:29 by LEEE03
Check DICT started at 08.03.2009 22:11:29 by LEEE03
X_STXH
Field TDNAME does not exist in the sender structure on sender system
X_STXH
Field TDOBJECT does not exist in the sender structure on sender system
X_STXH
Field TDID does not exist in the sender structure on sender system
X_STXH
Field TDNAME does not exist in the sender structure on sender system
X_STXH
Field TDOBJECT does not exist in the sender structure on sender system
X_STXH
Field TDID does not exist in the sender structure on sender system
Check DICT finished at 08.03.2009 22:11:29 by LEEE03
Check FIMA started at 08.03.2009 22:11:29 by LEEE03
Check FIMA finished at 08.03.2009 22:11:31 by LEEE03
Check RUMA started at 08.03.2009 22:11:31 by LEEE03
Check RUMA finished at 08.03.2009 22:11:31 by LEEE03
Check SELS started at 08.03.2009 22:11:31 by LEEE03
Check SELS finished at 08.03.2009 22:11:33 by LEEE03
Subactivity PC001_PCL_CHECK was completed on 08.03.2009 at 23:11:40 with status ERR
I have searched in sap marketplace and also google, no results come out.
Could anybody help me out?
Thanks.
Best Regards,
Eric Lee

I've implemented the note 1101544 in the central system
executed the report Z_CNVTDMS_08_FIELD_SET with P_PHASE to 'S'.
and after this, I re-executed the activity "Execute Consistency Checks" from the extended mode of the process tree several times.
But it remains the same issue.
Did I miss anything?

SELS error during consistency checks. Fieldname not found in sender

I'm stuck in the System Analysis section, after starting programs for Generation and Reveiver settings. The task "Execute Consistency Checks" returns an error in PC001_PCL_CHECK.
Check SELS started at 16.06.2011 14:38:31
Errors detected for conversion object A910 :
A910:Fieldname VKORG of structure S_A910 mentioned in selref not found in sender
Check SELS finished at 16.06.2011 14:39:00
The help says:
The selection field mentioned for the reduction of this conversion object does not exist in the sender system. Thus this selection field can not be used for reduction. Please remove the assignment of this conversion object from reduction. For further assistance please contact SAP support.
My question is simply HOW? Where can I remove this object? I don't even find a structure called S_A910 in any of my systems. I have table A910 but it doesn't have a field called VKORG in it at all... I'm somewhat lost here.
I've added the latest SPs (17) and also applied all the notes. At least I think I applied them all... I repeated the step several times, no luck.
Any ideas?
Thanks in advance
Stefan

Hi Sandeep,
Many thanks for your reply. The note hasn't fixed the issue so I'm still stuck with the exact same error. I did run it as described and while the report updated a few fields, it didn't help to eliminate the error. Reading the note it would appear that the error described there is different from what I'm facing.
> error message like : "TVKOV: member ID_VKORG of group G_VK has no selref field!
I am getting "Fieldname of structure S_A910 mentioned in selref not found in sender" so to me it looks like a different issue.
Oh well... Nothing like a bit of fun.

Obiee 11g RPD consistency check error after upgrade

Hi,
got below error in RPD consistency check after upgrading from obiee 10g to obiee 11.1.1.6.
*ERRORS:
Business Model Core:
[38028] Logical column Dim - Contact.Age Range does not have a valid data type.*
logical column Age=
CASE WHEN "Core"."Dim - Contact"."Age" < 18 THEN 'A: <18' WHEN "Core"."Dim - Contact"."Age" < 25 THEN 'B: 18-25' WHEN "Core"."Dim - Contact"."Age" < 35 THEN 'C: 25-35' WHEN "Core"."Dim - Contact"."Age" < 45 THEN 'D: 35-45' WHEN "Core"."Dim - Contact"."Age" < 55 THEN 'E: 45-55' WHEN "Core"."Dim - Contact"."Age" < 65 THEN 'F: 55-65' WHEN "Core"."Dim - Contact"."Age" IS NULL THEN 'Unspecified' ELSE 'G: >65' END
above is formula for logical column "Age" and data type for that is varchar in physical
few more erros similar to above.
how can I fix the issue? appreciate for your help.
Thanks
Jay.

HI,
As I said, Age has valid datatype in physical layer but datatype is showing as "Unknown" in logical layer after upgrade to 11g. many other columns got same issue just for this logical table. I rebuild the logical column mapped to physical sources but it didn't fix the issue.
I hope you understand the issue.
Thanks
Jay.
Edited by: Jay on Jul 23, 2012 11:02 AM

Get-DPMJob doesn't show On-going Consistency Check

When I use the $jobs=get-dpmJob -dpmservername DPM10 powershell command, the Consistency Check job type that shows a status of "in progress" in the DPM 2012 SP1 Admin Console does not show up in the
$jobs list variable under PowerShell.
However, on another DPM server, which is a primary server shows the "in progress" jobs under the job category of "validation" in PowerShell.
Why doesn't the command show the "in progress" jobs for my first case in PowerShell?
-Jenna

Hi
try this on
Get-DPMJob -DPMServerName dpm01 -Status Scheduled
or define a Date Range
Get-DPMJob -DPMServerName dpm01 -Status Scheduled -From (Get-Date).AddDays(6) -To (Get-Date).AddDays(7)
Seidl Michael | http://www.techguy.at |
twitter.com/techguyat | facebook.com/techguyat

TRM Consistency Check

Dear Guru,
I need an advice how to solve my problem
When I tried to run TRM Customization Consistency Check the message error occured
"Error in monitoring" with Object "LTSKM_LTKPL_ALERT" with cause "Superfluous structure"
And as recomendation solution to "Remove the structure (Monitoring -> Define Object Classes)"
Can anyone give me and idea what should I do with this problem?
Any help?
Thanks in Advanced
Best Regards,
Sugiharto Marsikin

Hey Sugiharto,
I get the same error, but we are running TRM on multiple sites for years now without any problems coming from the monitors.
Also see note 1118859:
__Solution__
Please implement the corresponding support package or implement and execute the Report Z_V_LMOCD_FIX which is provided in the correction instructions.
Cheers,
Hein

Production version consistency check

Hi,
I am facing an issue in which i have created a BOM and a master recipe group. The production version is created and all the things are maintained properly so that consistency check shows green light i.e. everything is fine.
Then i delete the same material from recipe group and then do the consistency check then it turns to yellow since recipe group is missing.
But when i reassign the material to the recipe group and do the consistency check then also it remains in yellow and gives 2 line items in check result :-
one with message that task list exists.
and another with missing task list /material assisgnment .(in this the todate is the date on which i deleted the assignment)
My confusion is that after reassignment it should turn back to green but it is not.
Can you please help on this.
Thanks
Rohit

Hi Rohit,
Check Production Version Valid from date and also Date from when you have reassign that material in Master Recipe again.Both should be match.
Regards,
Dhaval

Exchange 2010 "event id 403/401 The physical consistency check" Backups does not work...Critical!!

Hi,
At this moment our backups does not work. We have two error on the event viewer;
Exchange 2010 sp3 version 14.03.0158.001
We have only one server Exchange 2010 with two databases for users...
Event id 401;
Instance 1: The physical consistency check has completed, but one or more errors were detected. The consistency check has terminated with error code of -106 (0xffffff96).
Event id 403;
Instance 1: The physical consistency check successfully validated 629126 out of 1110272 pages of database '\\?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy33\exchangedb\global\global.edb'. Because some database pages were either not validated or failed validation,
the consistency check has been considered unsuccessful.

Hi Javier,
From your error description, I recommend you do the following steps for troubleshooting:
1. Please run CHKDSK and restart server.
2. Run a Database level Mailbox repair request.
What's more, here are some useful threads for your reference.
Create a Mailbox Repair Request
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff625221(v=exchg.141).aspx
Database Backup Failing with Event ID 2007, 9782, 401, 403, 254
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/4c8eccbf-435a-43ef-b3f6-0de5096413ee/database-backup-failing-with-event-id-2007-9782-401-403-254?forum=exchangesvravailabilityandisasterrecoverylegacy
Hope it helps.
If you need further assistance, please feel free to let me know.
Best regards,
Amy
We
are trying to better understand customer views on social support experience, so your participation in this
interview project would be greatly appreciated if you have time.
Thanks for helping make community forums a great place.

ALE Consistency Check Msg - Permissibility of function module

Hi,
I'm running a consistency check (BDM5) on a ALE model and I am getting a red messaged on Permissibility of function module - Function module is not valid. The function module does exist. What is this msg referring to?
Thanks,
Nancy

Hi Mateus,
The systems ED1, ET1 and EP1 are JAVA systems and therefore no client number applicable. When I run a project which has only a JAVA landscape there are no error. However, with a mixed landscape i.e. ABAP and JAVA in the same project this error message occurs.
At this point in time we have decide not to run projects with a mixed landscapes.
I am still interested to know if it's possible to run such a project and assign to CHaRM.
Regards,
Latief

Reg: consistency check in recordset structure validation

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for