Regarding XI practice

hi all
i am new to XI. for practice purpose i downloaded Netweaver2004s trail
version but XI is not available in that can any one tell me where can i download
XI. i want to pratice XI.
Is it possible to pratice online. if so can any one please send me links.

Hi,
>>>>version but XI is not available in that can any one tell me where can i download
you cannot
there is no XI trail version available
Regards,
michal

Similar Messages

Quick question regarding best practice and dedicating NIC's for traffic seperation.

Hi all,
I have a quick question regarding best practice and dedicating NIC's for traffic seperation for FT, NFS, ISCSI, VM traffic etc. I get that its best practice to try and separate traffic where you can and especially for things like FT however I just wondered if there was a preferred method to achieving this. What I mean is ...
- Is it OK to have everything on one switch but set each respective portgroup to having a primary and failover NIC i.e FT, ISCSI and all the others failover (this would sort of give you a backup in situations where you have limited physical NICs.
- Or should I always aim to separate things entirely with their own respective NICs and their own respective switches?
During the VCAP exam for example (not knowing in advance how many physical NIC's will be available to me) how would I know which stuff I should segregate on its own separate switch? Is there some sort of ranking order of priority /importance? FT for example I would rather not stick on its own dedicated switch if I could only afford to give it a single NICs since this to me seems like a failover risk.

I know the answer to this probably depends on however many physical NICs you have at your disposal however I wondered if there are any golden 100% rules for example FT must absolutely be on its own switch with its own NICs even at the expence of reduced resiliency should the absolute worst happen? Obviously I know its also best practice to seperate NICs by vender and hosts by chassis and switch etc

Infomation regarding Best Practices Required,

Dear Friends,
Happy New Year......
Im working as a part BI Excellence team in a reputed company.
I jst want to say a client to install the BI Best Practice(Scenario - SCM), inorder to do that i need to present him the advantages and difference between Best practice (SPECIFIC FOR BI) over General Implementation.
When i search in Help.sap.com, it generally speaks about the time consumption n guidelines of Overall SAP Best Practices.
Can anyone help me wrt to BI (From Blue Print to Go Live), Time line diferrences between SAP BI Best Practice and General Implementation.
An Example with Specific Scenario Like SCM, Taking a Cube for IM and describing the Start to End Implemenation process and its timeline. How the same differs, when we go by using a SAP BI Best Practice installation?
Please provide your Valuable suggesstions, as i dont hav any Implementation experience.
Requesting your Valuable Guidence.
Regards
Santhosh kumar.N

Hi,
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw2004s/helpdata/en/f6/7a0c3c40787431e10000000a114084/frameset.htm
http://help.sap.com/bp_biv370/html/Bw.htm
Hope it helps........
Thanks & Regards,
SD

Regarding Best Practices Documents

Hi All,
How to search and download SAP Best Practices documents.
Thanks in Advance
Pavan

Hi Pavan,
Pl go to the URL: http://help.sap.com/
On the top centre of the page, you find SAP Best Practise tab.
In there, you have Overview, Baseline packages, Industry packages, Cross-industry packages.
Click on the desired option and you get to download the BEST PRACTICES.
Given below is the Best practice URL for industry package for Automotive: Dealer business managament:
http://help.sap.com/bp_dbmv1600/DBM_DE/html/index.htm
(This is for your reference only).
Hope this helps!
Regards,
Shilpa

Regarding good practice

Hi,
Can somebody let me know whether it is a good practice to have two declare section in same procedure in pl/sql programming. Is there any draw back for same?
Regards,
basil Abraham.

user575682 wrote:
Can somebody let me know whether it is a good practice to have two declare section in same procedure in pl/sql programming. Is there any draw back for same? It is good practice not to have declare sections at all - as PL/SQL code is best done inside the Oracle database as stored packages and procedure and functions. This does not require a declare section at all - unless when dealing with the exception of dynamic PL code. (an exception that requires very sound technical reasoning)
For the external applications making PL/SQL calls using anonymous PL/SQL code blocks, these may use declare sections.. but usually not. Why?
Declarations are typical for variables to be used in the anonymous block. As bind variables should be used by the application, there is very seldom the need to make use of a declare section.
So the declare section is not something that you should often see and use in production PL/SQL code. Both in stored code in the database, and in anonymous block code in external applications.
Mostly the declare section is found in code (anonymous PL/SQL blocks) used for purposes like testing. (e.g. typically adhoc code and not formal production code)

Question regarding best practice

Hello Experts,
What is the best way to deploy NWGW?
We recently architected a solution to install the 7.4 ABAP stack which comes with Gateway. We chose the Central Gateway HUB scenario in a 3 -tier setup. Is this all that's required in order to connect this hub gateway to the business systems ie ECC? Or do we have to also install the gateway add-on on our business system in order to expose the development objects to the HUB? I'm very interested in understanding how others are doing this and what has been the best way according to your own experiences. I thought creating a trusted connection between the gateway hub and the business system would suffice to expose the development objects from the business system to the hub in order to create the gateway services in the hub out of them? Is this a correct assumption? Happy to receive any feedback, suggestion and thoughts.
Kind regards,
Kunal.

Hi Kunal,
My understanding is that in the HUB scenario you still need to install an addon in to the backend system (IW_BEP). If your backend system is already a 7.40 system then I believe that addon (or equivalent) should already be there.
I highly recommend you take a look at SAP Gateway deployment options in a nutshell by Andre Fischer
Hth,
Simon

New to ColdFusion - Question regarding best practice

Hello there.
I have been programming in Java/C#/PHP for the past two years or so, and as of late have really taken a liking to ColdFusion.
The question that I have is around the actual seperation of code and if there are any best practices that are preached using this language. While I was learning Java, I was taught that it's best to have several layers in your code; example: Front end (JSPs or ASP) -> Business Objects -> Daos -> Database. All of the code that I have written using these three languages have followed this simple structure, for the most part.
As I dive deeper into ColdFusion, most of the examples that I have seen from vetrans of this language don't really incorporate much seperation. And I'm not referring to the simple "here's what this function does" type of examples online where most of the code is written in one file. I've been able to see projects that have been created with this language.
I work with a couple developers who have been writing in ColdFusion for a few years and posed this question to them as well. Their response was something to the affect of, "I'm not sure if there are any best practices for this, but it doesn't really seem like there's much of an issue making calls like this".
I have searched online for any type of best practices or discussions around this and haven't seen much of anything.
I do still consider myself somewhat of a noobling when it comes to programming, but matters of best practice are important to me for any language that I learn more about.
Thanks for the help.

Frameworks for Web Applications can require alot of overhead, more than you might normally need programming ColdFusion, I have worked with Frameworks, including Fusebox, what I discovered is when handing a project over to a different developer, it took them over a month before they were able to fully understand the Fusebox framework and then program it comfortably. I decided to not use Fusebox on other projects for this reason.
For maintainability sometimes its better to not use a framework, while there are a number of ColdFusion developers, those that know the Fusebox framework are in the minority. When using a framework, you always have to consider the amount of time to learn it and succesfuly implement it. Alot of it depends on how much of your code you want to reuse. One thing you have to consider, is if you need to make a change to the web application, how many files will you have to modify? Sometimes its more files with a framework than if you just write code without a framework.
While working on a website for Electronic Component sourcing, I encountered this dynamic several times.
Michael G. Workman
[email protected]
http://www.usbid.com
http://ic.locate-ic.com

Advice needed regarding best practice

Hi - curious as to if what i have setup now should be changed to best utilize Time Machine. I have iMac with 750GB drive (a small chunk is partitioned for Vista) - lets assume I have 600 GB dedicated for the mac.
I havetwo firewire external drives - a 160GB and a 300GB.
Currently, I have my itunes library on the 300GB drive as well as a few FCE files. I have made the 160GB the Time Machine drive. Would I be better off moving my iTunes library to the internal HD and then using the 300GB drive as the Time Machine drive? As I have it now, I don't think my iTunes library is getting backed up. In an ideal situation, is it safe to assume your Time MAchine disk should be at leasta s large if not larger than the internal HD? Thanks.
Steve

Steve,
I would recommend using a drive that is 2x the size of the files you are going to back up. This is specifcally in the event that you make changes to the files and Time Machine starts backing up the new files that you have created. It will back up once every hour and it will only make a back-up copy of files that you have modified. If you are backing up your home folder, and you are using FCE, I would say back up to the 160Gb drive would be sufficient. If you were planning on backing up your home folder & your iTunes library, I would recommend the 300Gb drive. The only reason that you would need a backup drive 2x the size of your HD is if you were backing up your entire drive.

Best practice for a deplomyent (EAR containing WAR/EJB) in a productive environment

Hi there,
I'm looking for some hints regarding to the best practice deployment in a productive
environment (currently we are not using a WLS-cluster);
We are using ANT for buildung, packaging and (dynamic) deployment (via weblogic.Deployer)
on the development environment and this works fine (in the meantime);
For my point of view, I would like to prefere this kind of Deploment not only
for the development, also for the productive system.
But I found some hints in some books, and this guys prefere the static deployment
for the p-system.
My question now:
Could anybody provide me with some links to some whitepapers regarding best practice
for a deployment into a p-system ??
What is your experiance with the new two-phase-deploment coming up with WLS 7.0
Is it really a good idea to use the static deployment (what is the advantage of
this kind of deployment ???
THX in advanced
-Martin

Hi Siva,
What best practise are you looking for ? If you can be specific on your question we could provide appropriate response.
From my basis experience some of the best practices.
1) Productive landscape should have high availability to business. For this you may setup DR or HA or both.
2) It should have backup configured for which restore has been already tested
3) It should have all the monitoring setup viz application, OS and DB
4) Productive client should not be modifiable
5) Users in Production landscape should have appropriate authorization based on SOD. There should not be any SOD conflicts
6) Transport to Production should be highly controlled. Any transport to Production should be moved only with appropriate Change Board approvals.
7) Relevant Database and OS security parameters should be tested before golive and enabled
8) Pre-Golive , Post Golive should have been performed on Production system
9) EWA should be configured atleast for Production system
10) Production system availability using DR should have been tested
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Deepak Kori

All Information regarding Change and Transport management System in SAP

Hello Experts,
Iam into Basis . I need all information ,fundamentals and concepts over Change and Transport management system in SAP .Its fundamentals,the way it works ,how requests r transporteded etc. I want more of this information in regards to practical scenario. Plz dont provide help link as iam aware of that. I need good explanatory content ,in your own words shall be appreciated more. If any body has any self prepared good explanatory and procedural matter , tat will be of help.requested to revert at earliest as this is a bit urgent. My Email Id is [email protected]
Useful answers shall be rewarded points.
Thanks and Regards,
Somya

check this link
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_47x200/helpdata/en/d7/8eb9361a75ea43e10000009b38f839/frameset.htm

Best practices for apps integration with third party systems ?

Hi all
I would like to know if there is any document from oracle or from your own regarding best practices for apps integration with third party systems.
For example, in particular, let's say we need customization in a given module(ex:payables) need to provide data to a third party system, consider following:
outbound interface:
1)should third party system should be given with direct access to oracle database to access a particular payments data information table/view to look for data ?
2) should oracle create a file to third party system, so that it can read and do what it need to do?
inbound:
1) should third party should directly login and insert data into tables which holds response data?
2) again, should third party create file and oralce apps will pick up for further processing?
again, there could be lot of company specific scenarios like it has to be real time or not... etc...
How does companies make sure third party systems are not directly dipping into other systems (oracle apps/others), so that it will follow certain integration best practices.
how does enterprise architectute will play a role in this? can we apply SOA standards? should use request/reply using Tibco etc?
Many oracle apps implementations customizations are more or less directly interacting with third party systems by including code to login into respective third party systems and vice versa.
Let me your know if you have done differently and that would help oracle apps community.
thanks
rrb.

you want to send idoc to third party system (NONSAP).
what kind of system is it? can it handle http requests
or
can it handle webservice?
which version of R/3 you are using?
what is the mechanism the receiving system has, to receive data?
Regards
Raja

Failover cluster File Server role best practices

We recently implemented a Hyper-V Server Core 2012 R2 cluster with the sole purpose to run our server environment. I started with our file servers and decided to create multiple file servers and put them in a cluster for high
availability. So now I have a cluster of VMs, which I have now learned is called a guest cluster, and I added the File Server role to this cluster. It then struck me that I could have just as easily created the File Server role under my Hyper-V
Server cluster and removed this extra virtual layer.
I'm reaching out to this community to see if there are any best practices on using the File Server role. Are there any benefits to having a guest cluster provide file shares? Or am I making things overly complicated for no reason?
Just to be clear, I'm just trying to make a simple Windows file server with folder shares that have security enabled on them for users to access internally. I'm using Hyper-V Core server 2012 R2 on my physical servers and right now I have Windows
Server Standard 2012 R2 on the VMs in the guest cluster.
Thanks for any information you can provide.

Hi,
Generally with Hyper-V VMs available, we will install all roles into virtual machines as that will be easy for management purpose.
In your situation the host system is a server core, so it seems that manage file shares with a GUI is much better.
I cannot find an article specifically regarding "best practices of setting up failover cluster". Here are 2 articles regarding build guest cluster (you have already done) and steps to create a file server cluster.
Hyper-V Guest Clustering Step-by-Step Guide
http://blogs.technet.com/b/mghazai/archive/2009/12/12/hyper-v-guest-clustering-step-by-step-guide.aspx
Failover Cluster Step-by-Step Guide: Configuring a Two-Node File Server Failover Cluster
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc731844(v=ws.10).aspx
Please remember to mark the replies as answers if they help and un-mark them if they provide no help. If you have feedback for TechNet Support, contact [email protected]

SAP Upgrade from 4.7 to ECC 6.0 connected to BW 7.0 Best Practices

We are upgrading SAP R/3 4.7 to ECC 6.0. We have been running live in a BW 7.0 environment. We have done some enhancements for 2LIS_11_VAITM - Sales Document Item Data and 2LIS_13_VDITM - Billing Document Item Data datasources. We currently have a test instance that has been upgraded to ECC6.0.
What are the best business practices for testing BW to insure data transfer and enhancements are working correctly?
Eg. Should we connect the ECC6 instance to BWD and test there OR upgrade R/3 TST that is connected BWD and test there OR Upgrade QAS and test in BWQ.
Thanks in advance . . .
Edited by: RWC on May 4, 2011 6:26 PM

Hi RWC,
the plug-in will change slightly, you may notice differences in the screens of RSA2 and others after the upgrade.
Regarding best practices: In a recent upgrade our project team decided to create a parallel landscape with a new, additional Dev and QA on the R/3 side.
We connected these new systems to a BW Sandbox and the BW QA.
We identified all datasources, transfer rules and infopackages in use in production and recorded them with related objects onto transports in BW Dev. Before the import into BW Sandbox and BW QA we adjusted the system name conversion table to convert from old R/3 Dev to new R/3 Dev in order set up all the required connections for testing with the upgraded R/3 systems.
After the go LIVE of the upgrade we renamed the old R/3 Dev system in BW Dev and ran BDLS to convert everything (speak to your Basis team). That way we made sure not to lose any Development and we got rid of the old R/3 Dev system.
Take a look at this post for issues we encountered during this project and test everything you load in production.
Re: Impact on BI 7.0 due to ECC 5.0 to ECC 6.0 Upgrade
Best,
Ralf

Best practice to run Microsoft Endpoint Protection client in VDI environment

We are using Citrix XenDesktop VDI environment. Symantec Endpoint Protection client (VDI performance optimised) has been installed on the “streamed to the clients” virtual machine image. Basically, all the files (in golden image) have been “tattooed” with
Symantec signature. Now, when the new VM starts, Symantec scan engine simply ignores “tattooed” files and also randomise scan times. This is a rough explanations but I hope you’ve got the idea.
We are switching from Symantec to Microsoft Endpoint Protection and I’m looking for any information and documentation in regards best practice for running Microsoft Endpoint Protection clients in VDI environment.
Thanks in advance.

I see this post is a bt old but the organization I'm with has a very large VDI deployment using VMware. We also are using SCEP 2012 for the AV.
Did you find out what you were looking for or did you elect to take a different direction?
We install SCEP 2012 into the base image and manage the settings using GPO and the updates for defs are through the normal route.
Our biggest challenge is getting alert message from the client.
Thanks

Best Practice to Integrate CER with RedSky E911 Anywhere via SIP Trunk

We are trying to integrate CER 9 with RedSky for V911 using a SIP trunk and need assistance with best practice and configuration. There is very little documentation regarding "best practice" for routing these calls to RedSky. This trunk will be handling the majority of our geographically dispersed company's 911 calls.
My question is: should we use an IPsec tunnel for this? The only reference I found was this: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/enterprise-networks/virtual-office/deployment_guide_c07-636876.htmlm which recommends an IPsec tunnel for the SIP trunk to Intrado. I would think there are issues with an unsecure SIP trunk for 911 calls. Looking for advice or specifics on how to configure this. Does the SIP trunk require a CUBE or is a CUBE only required for the IPsec tunnel?
Any insight is appreciated.
Thank you.

you can use Session Trace in RTMT to check who is disconnecting the call and why.

Regarding XI practice

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for