Relationship between Object Type QK & Q

Can someone help here. I am trying to confirm if there is a relationship between object type QK (qualification group) & Q (qualification). I checked HRP1001 but did not seem to find a relationship between these two object types. Is there another table I need to check.
Thank you.

Hi,
Have you checked A/B 030?
Q A030 Is a specialization of QK
QK B030 Is a generalization of Q
The table for all relationships in general is T777E.
Hope this helps.
Donnie

Similar Messages

Relationship between material type and industry sector

Hi experts
when using t-code mm01,there are two fields material type and industry setor in screen.Is there any relationship between material type and industry sector? I want to know if user be able to see the material type related to particular industry sector?
thanks in advance!

Hello
There is no direct relationship between the material type and the industry sector.
The industry sector is used only for field sttus maintenance (fields in display/optional/requierd entry) in transactions.
We will assign seperate field reference groups to industry sectors and deopending on how we configure the field references, the fields will appear for the materials created for that industry sector.
regards

Relationship between Objects Not Found in PA

Dear all,
I have uploaded objects (Org Unit, Job, and Position) and the relationships between objects separately using LSMW.
When i checked the update of the relationship between objects in PA30, but the relationship between objects (Org Unit, Job, and Position) did not exist, yet exists in PP02.
I tried to upload the relationships between objects using holder (A008) in LSMW again, still I could not find the relationships in PA30, but exist in PP02.
Then I tried to run rhinte00 and rhinte30 to link the relationship between objects. I managed to get through rhinte00, but failed to run rhinte30.
Below is the report log when I tried to run rhinte30.
Report log:
Processing mode:   Processing successful
Number of personnel nos. selected :   0
Personnel numbers with errors:

Check the following.
1. Check if integration is active in T77S0 table PLOGI PLOGI = Your active plan version & PLOGI ORGA = X
2. Check if all your objects are created with this active plan version
3. Check the feature PLOGI to see if your PA PSA etc for the employee are integrated.
cheers
Ajay

Relationship between condition type and payment term

Hi,
I created a purchase order (only 1 item) with with payment term "Within 14 days 2 % cash discount" So a condition type SKTO auto added for the item with discount is 2%.
can anybody show me the relationship between payment term with the condition type and the IMG T.code to make this relationship?
Thanks
Long

If you go to IMG - MM- Purchasing - conditions- Define price determination process - Define Condition types
For SKTO the condition category is E- Cash discount
For this condition type which is defined in the calculation procedure , the system internally derives a percentage from the terms of payment and inserts it in the condition type with the category E

Help needed: modeling master-detail relationship using Object types

I would like to use object types to model a master-detail relationship. For e.g.
create or replace type detail_t as object
(id number,
name varchar2(20)
create or replace type details_t as
table of detail_t
create or replace type master_t as object
(id number,
name varchar2(20),
details details_t
If I don't use database object-tables, how can I return multiple master rows of the type above from a PL/SQL procedure? Can I return a cursor of some sort?
I'm using Oracle 8.1.7.
Thanks,
Niranja

Niranjan,
After the object types are defined, your data would come from either object tables or object views. In your case, to get multiple master rows, simply query the object view.
Regards,
Geoff

[Qualif.] Difference between object type 'Q' and infotype 0024

Hi,
For the xRPM 4.0 solution, we need to maintain skills for resources. There is a HCM integration functionality to import skills from a HR system to Business Partners (which - basically - represent users that can be staffed on a project in the xRPM solution).
Today, there is no skill management in our HR system.
There are 2 notions that look very similar to me :
- Infotype 0024 [Transaction PA20/PA30] : contains Qualifications of a user in PA (Personal Adminsitration) with the standard table T574A holding the possible values
- Organizational Structure (HRP1000/HRP1001) [transaction BP / PP* ?]: with the objects Qualifications 'Q' and Qualifications Group 'QK'
It seems taht the integration operates on the Organizational Structure. But we would like to assess both solutions.
What is the difference (pros&cons) between the 2 of them ?
Thanks in advance.
Best regards,
Guillaume
Message was edited by:
Guillaume GARCIA

To be precise, the way Infotype 24 behaves depends on whether integration between PA and PD is active. This is controlled by setting PLOGI QUALI in table T77S0. There are also other settings in this table that affect how quals work in an integrated scenario, you will find these in the QUALI XXXX section.
If integration is active, the qualifications are maintained in a catalogue via transaction OOQA. What you see in IT0024 are the object Q <--> P relationships as mentioned above once a qualification object has been assigned to the employee. This option has the advantages of being able to use the integrated objects in othe modules e.g. as prerequisites or imparted quals in the training module, skills/requirements matchup etc. The down side is that being PD objects, these are more difficult to report with SAP Query or Adhoc Query tools, but there are ways of doing it.
If integration is not active, the data is simple stored in PA table PA0024 and the quals themselves are set up via the IMG. The data really can't be used in any other module, but the reporting aspects are much easier with the standard query tools.
Regards,
John

Display relationships between objects

I've been tasked/ proposed to deliver a new project involving
two displayObjects... say 2 squares. Between those squares, I need
to show a connecting relationship of hierarchy. So, I need to have
a visual line connecting the 2 objects.
Does anyone know if there is already a class for this in Flex
or what I might use to demo this quickly. Never done this sort of
data visualization before, but the math can't be to hard.

"jwoozy" <[email protected]> wrote in
message
news:g96kmn$80o$[email protected]..
> I've been tasked/ proposed to deliver a new project
involving two
> displayObjects... say 2 squares. Between those squares,
I need to show a
> connecting relationship of hierarchy. So, I need to have
a visual line
> connecting the 2 objects.
>
> Does anyone know if there is already a class for this in
Flex or what I
> might
> use to demo this quickly. Never done this sort of data
visualization
> before,
> but the math can't be to hard.
>
I think there is something here
http://flexbox.mrinalwadhwa.com/,
but I
don't have time to search through it for you.
HTH;
Amy

Custom: use constant value in relationship between objects?

I have two related classes:
* Class A uses application identity, and has multiple PK fields, PK1 and
PK2.
* Class B has a 1-many relationship with class A. However, class B's
database table only has a column that relates to Class A's PK2 column.
(the PK1 value is a constant) for all Class B objects).
I have no idea how to express this relationship via kodo. Can anyone
assist?

What I've chosen to do is add a new DB column to my table which has a
constant value (ie: is the same for every row). Then I can join with it.
I'd request this simple feature to be added in a future release: the
ability to specify a literarl constant value as part of the join
criteria in the metadata. It could be very easily added: instead of
specifying a column containing the join value, you could put the literal
into the .jdo file.
thanks.
Patrick Linskey wrote:
You could put together a custom field mapping that performed the join
like you described if you really wanted to. Bear in mind, however, that
the field mapping APIs are subject to change etc. etc. etc.
-Patrick
On Tue, 20 May 2003 22:25:16 -0400, David Michaels wrote:
Thanks for the quick reply, as usual Abe.
In this case, I will link to the full PK of the related object, just one
of the components of that PK is a constant. There's no place to
override the SQL used for these sort of joins?
Perhaps I can do this with a view too.
Abe White wrote:
It's not possible to create a Kodo relation that doesn't actually link
to the (full) primary key of the related object. Note that in general,
that kind of database design is not a good idea, because there's no
guarantee you're linking to a unique object.
You can use a Kodo query to get the related objects; you could hide the
query behind your getter method.

Relationship between objects and information stored in a database

I've got a question that's pretty broad... but maybe someone can help with it.
I'm writing a couple of classes, one called "Customer" and the other "Store". Store can contain any number of customers, which it keeps in an array. A customer object has name and address fields, as well as an array of the current movies the customer has checked out. A third "Driver" class has the main method which calls the other two classes. When a new customer is created, it is put into the array in an object of store, and written to disk in a file named with the customer's ID number.
My question is, I'm not really sure how objects tie in with the actual database on the hard disk. For example, if I run the program once and add 3 customers, all three get written to disk, and exist in memory as objects. However, when I exit the program, I lose all 3 of those objects from the array of customers in the store object.
So, when I run the program a second time, the array is gone, though the customer information remains on disk. I have methods to delete/add customer objects to an object of store, but those don't do me any good without the array in memory. I thought that I could just load all data from disk, and put them back into the array, but isn't that inefficient if the database is very large? Is there a better way to deal with this?
I hope that was reasonably clear. I'd appreciate any help. Thanks.

i would make the store a manager of the customer objects whose
responsibilities include read and writing the objects as well as caching
them.
here is some sample code for this.
public class Customer(){
int id;
/* the id field is the unique identifier for each Customer.
 this field should probably be our primary key in our database
 table. you don't have to use a number but whatever it is it
 needs to be unique */
boolean updated;
public Customer(int customerId){
 id = customerId;
 updated = false;
public int getCustomerId(){
 return id;
/* if the customer object has been changed and needs to flushed back
 to the database this returns true. */
public boolean needsFlushing(){
 return updated;
/* and your other methods go here... */
}and now for the Store...
public class Store{
private Customer[] cache;
public Store(){
 cache = new Customer[10];
 /* here i have hard coded as 10, you could change this or for more
 flexibility use a Vector or such. */
/* spin through the cache and return the matching customer. if the
 customer is not in the cache load it in the database. */
public Customer getCustomer(int customerId)throws SQLException{
 for(int j=0;j<cache.length;j++){
 if((cache[j]!=null)&&(cache[j].getCustomerId()==customerId)){
 return cache[j];
 Customer c = loadCustomer(customerId);
 addToCache(c);
 return c;
public void addCustomer(Customer c)throws SQLException{
 /* adds a new (non-existing customer) */
 saveCustomer(c);
 addToCache(c);
public void close()throws SQLException{
 /* flushes back any updated customers */
 for(int j=0;j<cache.length;j++){
 if((cache[j]!=null)&&(cache[j].needsFlushing())){
 saveCustomer(cache[j]);
 cache = null;
private Customer loadCustomer(int customerId)throws SQLException{
 /* here would be code for loading a customer object from the
 database that matches the customerId. */
 return new Customer(customerId);//temporary
private void saveCustomer(Customer c)throws SQLException{
 /* here would be the code for saving the customer c into the
 database */
private void addToCache(Customer c){
 /* this method adds the customer c to the cache. it may have to
 to remove an older customer from the cache to do this. i leave
 the algorithm for deciding this up to you */

How do I create parent/child relationship between objects? so that if I change one, I change all

I have multiple instances of an object, and I would like to make any changes that I put on one of these objects to perpetuate and change on the other instances of the object

turn your object into a symbol, and place multiple instances of it on the artboard, when you edit the symbol all instances will update.

Creating custom mappings between objects

I currently have a db schmea that supports "soft" deletes. Example:
Client table has fields:
id - primary key (number)
name - varchar
active ("Y" or "N" where "Y" means active and "N" means "INACTIVE")
We also have a table Users:
id - primary key (number)
name - varchar
active ("Y" or "N" where "Y" means active and "N" means "INACTIVE")
When I delete a user I want to set its active field to "N" and then when
someone reads users from the client (after I have saved my changes) I want
only users whoses active field is "Y" to be returns, i.e.
Client clientA = <read client A>
Collection users = clientA.getUsers();
Is there a way to configure/customize the mapping/relationship between
objects?
Thanks!
Bruce

All of the emails are really my way of getting a soft delete to work. Does
KODO support this feature or is their a standard work around to support
this feature?
Thanks!
Bruce
Alex Roytman wrote:
You could break you collection into multiple mutually exclusive
subcollections (like active/inactive) and have your object model to map them
separately (via views with mutually exclusive criterion) When changing a
collection member's status you will need to move it from active collection
to inactive. Complete collection can be dode as dybamic (delegating)
composition of the subcollections (but it will cost twice as much to fetch
it)
Try to resolve your issues on object model level. I believe altering sql
mappings to make them very fancy will cause you lots of grief in the long
run
"Bruce" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I also want to do something similiar to support object history. I could
have a Client object which gets modified and instead of editing this
object I would copy it, inactivate the copy and then edit the original.
This allows for full history. I can always select by active (or a more
complicated status) to get the rest of the history instead of the "top".
Views here seems like a hack. I have activew fields in all of my tables so
I would nee views for each table which is a lot to manage if fields are
changing (need to change them in both places). Also this creates issues
since views are really read-only.
Isn't there a way to change the SQL used to read a relationship?
Bruce
Alex Roytman wrote:
map your classes against views with (where active = 'Y') to make sure
"soft
deleted" records do not get read and have your object model to handlesoft
deletes (like removing from collections etc) use helper methods to do"soft
deletes" masking real deletes is not good idea - you will need them atsome
point
"Stephen Kim" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
While there is nothing default that does particularly what you desire,
but from my perspective, you should not have Kodo do anything by
default
as you will probably want to delete the inactive instances at somelater
point.
Instead you should look into Query.setCandidates:
http://www.solarmetric.com/Software/Documentation/2.4.3/docs/jdo-javadoc/jav
ax/jdo/Query.html
i.e. public Collection getActiveUsers ()
PersistenceManager pm = JDOHelper.getPersistenceManager
(this);
Query q = pm.newQuery (User.class, true);
q.setFilter ("active == "N"");
q.setCandidates (users);
return q.execute ();
I haven't tested the above code and there are a lot of optimizations
you
could do such as caching the query in a transient collection but Ithink
you get the idea.
You may want to post your thoughts on our newsgroups
(news://news.solarmetric.com) and see how other people are tackling
similar probles..
Bruce wrote:
I currently have a db schmea that supports "soft" deletes. Example:
Client table has fields:
id - primary key (number)
name - varchar
active ("Y" or "N" where "Y" means active and "N" means "INACTIVE")
We also have a table Users:
id - primary key (number)
name - varchar
active ("Y" or "N" where "Y" means active and "N" means "INACTIVE")
When I delete a user I want to set its active field to "N" and then
when
someone reads users from the client (after I have saved my changes)I
want
only users whoses active field is "Y" to be returns, i.e.
Client clientA = <read client A>
Collection users = clientA.getUsers();
Is there a way to configure/customize the mapping/relationship
between
objects?
Thanks!
Bruce
Stephen Kim
[email protected]
SolarMetric, Inc.
http://www.solarmetric.com

Relationship btween object in h.r

hellow i have a work in hr (abap)and i wont to learn about the relationship between objects in h.r like(objid,sobid,pernr...). if some one now about pdf or something else that can help i will appraise it .
(some one told me about the book hr 50 but i dont have it so i dont now) thanks ahead .

Hi,
The pdf in the following link gives an overview of org. object and their relationshipd. For detailed help refer help.sap.com.
http://www.purdue.edu/onepurdue/contribute_pdf/overview-of_om_objects.pdf
Thanks,
Prasath N

Object type vs interface type

Hello experts,
can anyone tell me whats the difference between object type and interface type avilable in swo1 transaction.
i also wnt to know, what is object ... object type and classes?
waiting for reply..
-Shweta

Class is just like some folder holding all the objects related to this class, lets say youve a class comanies then this class should hold all the objects related to the company, like
company id, company name , company address,, etc
for the objects types there are 3 types of them
Dimension
Details
Measure
Dimension, is the indecator for this objects, like companyID, so this is a dimenions which is indecates the company
Details, is the some extra information about some Dimension
if you have a dimension CompanyID, you can put the CompanyAddress object as a detail object for the CompanyID dimension and also like CompanyFAX , CompanyPhone,, etc
Measure, when you say measure that means something you use to measure things, when it comes to some measure in this company, like if we say a sales system, then the amount of the sales should be measure, coz you measure your company performance based on the sales amount same also for no of transactions, cost,,,, etc
and they always be aggregated to some aggregate function
like SUM, AVG, MAX, MIN,,,, etc
hope this was helpfull
good luck

Additional data on relationship between two objects

Hi
We have a requirement to capture additional data on a relationship between two objects. The data to be captured are custom fields that are unique to the relationship between the objects and not specific to either of the objects.
We created a new object type and related it to the position (S)and the job (C) object. In the customising (Personnel Management/Personnel Development/Basic Settings/Maintain Relationships there is an option to set up Additional Data. There are however several restrictions (e.g. the substructure has to be in T77AD). When you set up an existing substructure (e.g. PAD22) and screen (e.g. 3000), it works really well, however we have not been able to get this to read our own substructure and screen (since there is no customer include on HRP1001 and the 'Additional data' button seems to go to MP100100 to find the screen).
My question is two fold:
a) Is this an allowed customisation (e.g. can we create our own substructure, screen and Query string)? And if so, how does the data get into T77AD (since SAP recommends that data should not be added to this table)? and
b) Is there any documentation on this (thus far I have only received info on how to enhance infotypes which I don't think is relevant???)?
If this can not be maintained is there any other suggestions on how to deal with this scenario?
Any assistance will be appreciated.
Regards
Liezl

Hi everyone
Thanks for everyone who tried to assist us with this. I am happy to report that our in-house guru's have found the answer. So, for anyone who is interested:
In programme MP100100 you have a screen 6000 which is a customer enhancements screen. We set up two in-house function modules for the PBO and PAI with its own screen and added an append structure to PAD31 to add the fields required. In the configuration, we then specified PAD31 as the substructure with screen 6000 and then also specified our own PBO and PAI function modules. The parameters required for screen 6000 is set up within our own customer screens.
Hope this will be helpful to someone - it certainly seemed to open up some doors for us!
Regards
Liezl

Are there two type of associations between objects or are there just different representations?

I've been spending some time on 're-tuning' some of my OOP understanding, and I've come up against a concept that is confusing me.
Lets say I have two objects. A user object
and an account object.
Back to basics here, but each object has state, behaviour and identity (often referred to as an entity object).
The user object
manages behaviour purely associated with a user, for example we could have a login(credentials) method
that returns if successfully logged in or throws exception if not.
The account object
manages behaviour purely associated with a users account. For example we could have a method checkActive() that checks if the account is active. The account object checks if the account has an up-to-date subscription, checks if there are any admin flags added
which would make it inactive. It returns if checks pass, or throws exception if not.
Now here lies my problem. There is clearly a relationship between user and account,
but I feel that there are actually two TYPES of association to consider. One that is data driven (exists only in the data/state of the objects and the database) and one that is behaviour driven (represents an object call to methods of the associated object).
Data Driven Association
In the example I have presented, there is clearly a data association between user and account.
In a database schema we could have the following table:
USER_ACCOUNTS
id
user_id
When we instantiate the account and
load the database data into it, there will be a class variable containing user_id.
In essence, the account object
holds an integer representation of user through user_id
Behaviour Driven Association
Behaviour driven associations are really the dependencies of an object. If object A calls methods on object B there is an association going from A to B. A holds an object representation of B.
In my example case, neither the user object
nor the account object
depend on each other to perform their tasks i.e. neither object calls methods on the other object. There is therefore no behaviour driven association between the two and neither object holds an object reference to the other.
Question
Is the case I presented purely a case of entity representation? The association between user and account is
always present, but its being represented in different ways?
ie. the user entity
has an identity that can be represented in different forms. It can be represented as an object (the instantiated user object)
or as a unique integer from the users table in the databases.
Is this a formalised way of recognising different implementations of associations or have I completely lost my mind?
One thing that bugs me is how would I describe the differences in UML or similar? Or is it just an implementation detail?

It s a bit hard to fully understand what is problem actually in :). I think you are a bit mixing some concepts.
Entities representation
At first, all models we are implementing is just a simplification of some real-world objects and environment. Your conceptual entity user corresponds to some real user and contains some attributes we are intresteing in according to application needs. Thus there
are some models we have to implement.
Thus, all user defined by DB schema, user defined by class, and probably user defined by some presentation logic is normally present some real-world user. It is only about implementation purposes, we have to store, view and manipulate with user.
On the other hand let's take a look on Single Responsibility Principle. It tells us to use every class or program unit just for certain needs. Using single user (class or program unit) for storage and presentation needs violates this principles.
the user entity has an identity that can be represented in different forms. It can be represented as an object (the instantiated user object) or as a unique integer from the users table in the
databases.
So, the answer is yes.
Associations and dependencies
I think it is more about terminology than about nature of problem. But in general you are right - there are different types of object realtions (especially, I will use other terms to list it). For example "referencing", "creation", "using",
"coordinating", "storing", "inheriting" (!) ....
According to this, user instance references account instance. And A instance uses B instance.
For most cases it is good enough to distinguish just "referencing" and "using". It is what you've just written. It's enough common and abstract to be understood by other person when talking about domain, e.g.
But sometimes, to emphasize some aspects you should describe relations in a way like "A dispatches ensemble of Bs" or "R stores X to database". It's more applicable for specification and modelling.
Is this a formalised way of recognising different implementations of associations or have I completely lost my mind?
To call something formalized I suggest to look at UML.
UML and other modelling instruments
One thing that bugs me is how would I describe the differences in UML or similar? Or is it just an implementation detail?
There are a lot of UML models (diagrams). Let's take a look at most well-known - Classes and Objects Diagram.
It's interesting that UML allows to present all type of object relations, and moreover allows to decide "is it just an implementation detail".
Martin Fowler describes 3 levels (or point of views) of understanding of Classes Diagram.
Conceptual. Diagram is considered as high-level domain model, independent from implementation.
Specification. Diagram is considered as high-level realization model containing of interfaces.
Implementation. Diagram is considered as low-level technical paper containing interfaces, classes, references, other types of relations.
Is this a formalised way of recognising different implementations of associations or have I completely lost my mind?
Yes, you have to fix some point of view and choose appropriate relations set.
For example, let's take a look at Classes Diagram and consider it from an implementation point of view. UML defines 3 type of relations (and propose corresponding means to its designation):
Association
Association corresponds "referencing" between instances.
Dependency
Dependency combines all types of relations such as "using", "creating", "storing", etc.
Inheritance.
Inheritances as a fundamental OOP instrument is presented by UML in a distinct way. It's more about classes than about instances, but also one can say that A instance inherit attributes of B instance. So, that's ok.
First and second points of view on Class Diagram, as I remember uses only one type of relation unifying both associations and dependencies and is designated like association (no inheritance, of course).
Also, UML proposes Objects Diagram which is same to Classes Diagram, but fits better for runtime modelling needs.
Finally, a choice of a set of relations taken into consideration depends on a context and point of view. UML provides some ones.

Relationship between Object Type QK & Q

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for