Sort Version

Hi
Can any body through some light on the functionality,use of sort version in asset reporting
Thanks in advance

Hello emani,
Sort versions are used for sorting and totaling the data records in report lists in Asset Accounting. You enter the sort version as a parameter before running the report. The system offers a standard sort as a default for each report. You can change this default. When you choose the entry help on the Sort version field, the system displays an overview of the existing sort versions.
You can modify existing sort versions in Customizing for Asset Accounting. Choose Information System. You can create completely new sort versions under the Edit menu option. Follow the procedure below;
Name the sort version using a 4 character identification code. You enter this identification code as a parameter when running reports in order to obtain the desired sorting or totaling.
Choose a name that has some meaning to you, in order to assist you when you use entry help.
The sort version function is not available in standard reports that are based on ABAP query.
It is not possible to use tables that deal with transactions (ANEK or ANEPV). For example, if you use the transaction type as a sort criterion, it is unavoidable that assets are listed more than once. Depending on the type of report, multiple listing of assets can lead to considerable problems.
The program does not perform a check of the tables used when you define a sort version. This type of check would make it impossible to use your own customer tables for sort versions for reports you programmed yourself.
Hope this helps. please reward points accordingly.
Rgds
manish

Similar Messages

Creation of new sort version in T.code OAVI

Hi Gurus,
Can you please help me,
I am Supposed to create New sort version(Tcode OAVI), is it possible to create a version with more than 5 fields?
I am not able to create a sort version, with more than 5 fields,
If possible , kindly provide a solution.........
Regards
VSK

hi Santosh,
unfortunately there is no way. It is prohibited in the program (i.e. : only 5 lines are whown for maintenance, if you want to page down to the 6th line, than the first line is shown again)
ec

Sort version issue

Dear all
i need to know how to add more than 5 fields in a sort version
path
img-Asset Accounting -Information System -Define Sort Versions for Asset Reports
here my sort version is 0001 here already 5 tables & 5 fields are avilable .
I want to add one more row
table :ANLAV
field :QUAN
Regards
Ajeesh.s

Hi,
A Sort Variant can have only a maximum of 5 fields in it, in case if you want more than this, then you need to copy the SAP standard asset report into Zreport with the help of ABAP technical for create or extend smart forms, then add all required fields to be displayed to it.
try this S_ALR_87009120 - Define Sort Variants
Regards
Sridhar

Transport of Sort Version configured in OAVI

Hi,
        I created a sort variant in OAVI with the following fields
ANLAV     BUKRS     Company Code     0     0
ANLAV     KTANSW     Bal.sh.acct APC     0     0
ANLAV     ANLKL     Asset Class                          0     0
ANLAV     AIBDT     Acq.orig.ast.on     0     0
and Total selected for the first three fields.
In the development I could see the report with the original acquisition date. But when i transpoerted the sort version to Quality the Original Aquisition date is always 0000.00.00 although the assets have original aquisition dates. Please let me know if this could be a Transport related issue error or do i have to follow any specific aspects.
Thanks,
Raja.

Hi All,
          The issue is resolved when i selected the Total Check box for the AIBDT field.
Thanks
Raja.

Number of Sort Levels into Sort Versions for Asset Reports

Hello gurus,
Is the number of "sort Levels" limited to five for asset sort versions (transaction OAVI)?
If yes, does it mean that the only solution, if I have more than 5 fields to add, is to include my own fields into standard ALV reports?
Thank you in advance for your help
Best regards
Pascal.

Hi,
Nathan is correct, 5 sort levels max.
But of course you have more flexibility with the ALV reports (ALV = SAP List Viewer). You can define additional sort criteria on the output list, and save these in layout variants. Then you can execute the reports directly (except asset history sheet) with these layouts by using them in the selection screen.
Regards,
Markus

Error when using sort variant 0005 for RABEWG01 (tcode za353)

Hi SAP experts,
I have a problem with program RABEWG01 (tcode za353). When I use sort variant 0005 and execute it, I get this error:
Table ANLV is not supported in the requested report
Message no. AB066
Diagnosis
You requested sort version 0005 for the current report. The sort version contains a field in table ANLV. However, the report does not process this table. Therefore the sort version cannot access this table and this field.
System Response
The report is not executed with sort version 0005.
Procedure
Enter a sort version that uses only valid tables. The following tables are supported in the current report:
ANLAV ANLB
Can someone help me to explain why ANLV is not supported in the requested report? If we can't use sort variant 0005, why is it there in the first place?
==========================================
Field:
Company code: 001
Report date: 30.03.2011
Dep area: 01
do I need to add any more entries in the field so that i can use sort variant 0005? thanks!

Hi,
note 21719 explains the reason for he error:
" Fields from tables ANLP and ANLV can only be used in a sort version if
the same tables are used in the relevant report (currently only the case
with reports RAGAFA01 and RAVERS01). If these fields are used in other
reports, runtime error GET_WA_NOT_ASSIGNED could occur..."
regards Bernhard

Sort 1D Array

La fonction "Sort 1D Array" accepte en entrée un Tableau de n'importe quel type.
N'importe quel type ... hmmm, presque.
Returns a sorted version of array with the elements arranged in ascending order.
If array is an array of clusters, the function sorts the elements by comparing the first elements.
If the first elements match, the function compares the second and subsequent elements.
Résolu !
Accéder à la solution.

oui, j'avais remarqué ... si on place le string en 1er dans le Cluster ... la fonction accepte.
Dans ce cas, le tri s'effectue sur le string et la fonction ne tient pas compte de la présence de la ref.
Dans l'absolu, vouloir "trier" des references entre elles n'a pas de sens.
Il faudrait trier l'équivalent U32 .... cela, à mon sens, est vide de sens.
par contre la fonction "recherche" accepte une Ref. ... mais rechercher une référence a du sens.
Les fonction "Tri" et "Recherche" ont toutes les deux cette même phrase dans leur "doc_help" respective.
"accepte un Tableau de n'importe quel type".
Pour la fonction "recherche", c'est parfaitement juste ... pour la fonction "Tri", cette phrase est fausse.
Je voulais pointer la doc qui parfois est lègèrement erronée.
Petit défaut de ma part, je suis perfectionniste ... mais je me soigne.
En fait, je suis perfectionniste uniquement pour ce qui a une réelle importance pour moi.
Pour le reste, je peux laisser tout pourrir en tas et enjamber le chose ... sans le moindre scrupule

Sort variant with WBS element...

Dear All,
I need to create a sort variant to use in AR01 report to capture the WBS element. But when i am creating the sort variant, it is saying this report can process tables only ANLAV, ANLB and ANLCV, here wbs element investment project field is there in ANLAV. but i want anothother field From ANLZ. What do i need to do...

Hi,
Hope you are looking for ANLZ fields.
Go to OAVI and create your own sort version.
There for WBS elemant, add table name as ANLZ and field name as PS_PSP_PNR2 / IPSNR and press enter
SAVE it.
This will definetely work out.
Thanks,
Srinu

Sort differences

A Linux-using friend asked for help creating a script to sort files numerically on the 2nd comma-delimited field of a set of Ascii files. So, at home on my Mac, I consulted the man page and came up with the following, which works just fine:
sort -t, -k2n filename
However, it doesn't work on Linux, where it doesn't complain about anything, it just doesn't sort correctly. The Linux man pages seem to support this set of options. (Yeah, I know, it's not Linux, but the sort program that's at issue. And this is a Mac forum, not a Linux one.) The Mac sort is from GNU while the two Linux (Ubuntu and Red Hat) sorts are from FSF.
Could this simply be chalked up to an FSF sort bug?
If anyone cares to play with this, here is some test data.
xyz,5,abc
asdfa,3,asdfads
werttwrwrtwtr,2,43234545
a,4,z
qqqqq,10,zzzz

Hi Ken,
Your post is quite interesting. The command line syntax of the sort command is quite complilcated and always a headache to me. The following are what I have found:
(1) It is always safer to specify the sort key as -k2,2 (not -k2). If you specfy just -k2 then it means "from the 2nd field to the end of the line". So
sort -t, -k2,2n filename
should give the desired result (both in Linux and MacOSX).
(2) GNU and FSF are "virtually" the same thing (FSF supports GNU project). The sort command in Tiger is from GNU but quite old
Tiger$ sort --version
sort - GNU textutils 1.14
The ones in (recent) Linux distros are also from GNU but much newer (textutils 2.x or coreutils, which is the successor of textutils).
(3) Older sort commands (like the one in Tiger) do not consider comma "," as part of a number. But newer ones can recognize the "thousands separator", with locale support. "Locale supoort" means that the values of the "decimal point" and the "thousands separator" depend on the locale (for example, French locale uses different values than many other locales.) If no locale is specified then it behaves as the older version, so
Linux$ LC_NUMERIC=C sort -t, -k2n filename
would work (but better to use -k2,2n).
(4) The newer sort also has the -g option. This can handle scientific notation like "6.022e-23", but slower than -n and can be affected by the rounding error. It seems -g does not support the "thousands separator".
(5) Sometimes (not always) "info sort" gives more recent (or detailed) description of the command than "man sort".

Asset Acquisitions (Mid-Quarter-Convention) Report

Hello All,
I am executing the report S_ALR_87012047 by which i am getting the US tax report in List form(display) and also i am giving the sort version as 7, by which i am getting the report in List format.
But my query is i am able to see the US Tax report given in SAP Press release book as Grid Display and it is according to the Quarter wise they have displayed the report. Anyone help me out to display the report in Grid and with Quarter wise.
For the above do i need to create a layout?
Regards
VEnk@

The reports are based on complete fiscal year.
You can have a look to the transaction:
ARQ0 - Ad Hoc Reports
The reports 27 and 28
Then you can combine a standard report with this in EXCEL

Asset report with vendor number and vendor desc wise

Hi Gurus
The requirement is to generate asset reports with the below fields:
Asset class, Asset number & desc, vendor number & desc
Suppose say all asset balances should be reported by vendor name and desc.
I couldn't get the right results using an existing or a custom sort version. Do not want to go with a custom report or a SAP query.
Any pointers in this regard would be helpful.
Thanks
Sekhar

Hi,
You can use table ANLA.
Populate the asset field then go to settings tab and choose fields.
Check the following fields given below:
BUKRS
ANLN1
ANLKL
LIFNR
TXT50
then execute.
hope it helps.
regards,
otep

Vendor name in Asset Master Table

Hi all,
If i open any asset master with Tcode AS02, i am able to see the vendor code and vendor name in the origin tab in the asset master.
And the fileds filled in asset master will be stored in table called ANLA, when i open the said table for the respective asset, there i am able to see only the vendor code only not the vendor name field.
the vendor name field ANLA-LIEFE was showing blank, as it was showing data in the asset master.
I think there might a technical issue in this regard.
Please suggest me to fix this bug.
Thanks,
Srinu

Hi
It is not a bug,
This field is currently for informational purposes only.
You can only use this field to define sort versions.
SAP-Definition of Sort version."A means of defining groups and group totals in asset reports. All fields of the asset master record can be used as group and/or sort criteria for defining a sort version. You enter the sort version key when starting a report."
regards

Apple fails to fix TV with 3.0.2

I realise that for many users, it is the video capabilities of the TV that are important. But although these are useful, for me and many others it is the TV's musical abilities which are of paramount importance and these took a backward step with v3 that has STILL not been resolved.
A bit of background.
Over time, iTunes has introduced many invaluable features such as the 'Sort' field/tags and the Compilation flag. Any track with the latter set can be grouped under a single "Compilations" heading in the Artists list so these artists do not clutter up the main Artist list. This is invariably crucial as there can be very many of these and they're not really relevant when viewing the list of Artists. But the Apple developers thought this through and the user can set this flag at their own choice, so the user has complete control over how to use this setting - brilliant. Just toggle that checkbox on and off will absolutely determine whether that track is so grouped or not. As I said, brilliant.
Sadly, Apple didn't immediately extend this genius to their other products, but over time this facility has made it to iPods etc. and I'm pretty sure it worked the same way in v2.4 of the TV. Then came v3 and guess what, they broke it.
I've been waiting for them to fix this (and much feedback has been sent to ensure they are aware of their errors), but this latest 3.0.2 has changed NOTHING. The main Artist list still shows some 'Compilation Artists' After some messing about I have found that not only does the Compilation flag have to be set, but you MUST have something in the 'Album Artist' field for it to be excluded from the main Artist list, although setting that flag is sufficient for it to list under the Compilations heading. So 2 different criteria are being applied to the Compilations and Artists lists. Sorry, but this is simply crappy programming. If I have a single track by an artist, which I want kept out of the main Artists list, I now have to add some dummy text into the 'Album Artist' field that really ought to be empty (since there is NO Album). It shouldn't be necessary to have to fudge it like this.
And then there's the disastrous sorting they use.
Again, we can refer back to iTunes. Some time back we got the additional 'Sort' fields/tags. This finally allowed us to sort everything EXACTLY how we wanted and iTunes is now VERY good in this regard, but once again, they haven't followed it through onto the other products. Or more precisely, just as with Compilations, I'm sure they did fix this in TV v2.4, but broke it again in v3 and 3.0.2 still does NOT fix it.
The problem is that the TV ignores the sort fields, so the Artist list sorts e.g. "Bob Dylan" under 'B'. This is unbelievably moronic when they themselves introduced a special Sort version of that field/tag in which the user can put what they like and in this case I use "Dylan, Bob" which means in iTunes it sorts under 'D' although it is always displayed correctly as "Bob Dylan". But on the TV the sort is obviously only done on the actual Artist field/tag. The same problem is exhibited with sorting the Albums for the selected Artist - they use the Album field/tag when they should be using the Sort Album field/tag.
Yet another glaring example of their failure to correctly work with the data is when listing All Songs for an Artist. Who could possibly want an alphabetically sorted list of tracks. Shuffled, maybe, although not for me, but there already is an option to choose that if desired. But alphabetical? Default sort should be by Sort Album, then Track Number. If they think alphabetical sorting is so important, offer it as an alternate option, but I can't see anyone picking it out of choice.
These are really very basic database concepts. The actual programming required to fix these problems would be trivial, it is simply not rocket science and don't be mistaken in thinking I only want things my way. My whole point here is that these special 'Compilation' and 'Sort' field/Tags are available to every user so EVERYONE could have it how they want it and indeed already do in iTunes. But currently the TV shortchanges its owners by not providing the same functionality. This really is a chronic state of affairs.
What is so exasperating about these problems (both Compilations and Sorting) is that iTunes started it all and does it correctly, but other Apple products haphazardly ignore it all and make a complete hash of it. I just don't know what more I can do about this apart from send more feedback. At the moment I have 5 TVs that are no more than glorified AirPort Expresses to use with AirTunes since accessing the music directly from within the TV interface is hopeless.
I know I am not alone in my frustration about these problems, so can I IMPLORE everyone who feels the same to keep hitting Apple with feedback about this sorry state of affairs and hopefully they will eventually see sense.

While on the subject of consistency (or NOT, as the case may be), there's a couple of other things that have always bugged me on most of the 'iTunes Connected Products (iTCPs) that again, iTunes gets right.
First of all, I am picky about how my music collection is organised and have spent a LOT of time getting it so that iTunes does it exactly how I want, which in itself is a testament to how good iTunes is that it can handle my exacting requirements. When browsing my Library, I always have the Artist and Album browser showing so I can select an artist and then see a list of their albums, with of course all the tracks in the other part of the window. If I select an artist with only a single album, it all works in exactly the same way, with just that single album in the Album list and its tracks displayed below (or beside depending on your preference). This makes sense to me. The operation and display is consistent, independent of how many albums that artist may have (in your Library that is).
But, on most of the other iTCPs, if you 'drill down' using the main Artist list, selecting that artist with only a single album, you go directly to the list of tracks, whereas if there are several albums, you of course get the Album list first.
This I find immensely irritating.
Primarily because it breaks all the consistency guidelines, not only those that Apple stipulated all those years ago, but also those set by iTunes. I can see why they did it, thinking that it saves the intermediate step of having to select that one single album to get its list of tracks. There's no alternative album to select so why make the user click twice. But this is faulty logic. If the entire OSX interface was based on shortcuts like this, it would be a disaster and no-one would know where the **** they were (Ha, a bit like Windows). So why distort the interface in this way for the iTCP interfaces.
But there's another real reason why this is a bad idea. You cannot find the name of an artist's album if you only have one in your Library. As soon as you select the artist, you get a list of tracks. Er, what's the name of the album? Can't tell. You have to actually play a track to find out. How crappy is that.
Since I suspect that for many users this is not a bother to them (just as well they don't design software then) I have requested this as an option that can be chosen by the user. So everyone can have it working just how they like.
While I'm on the subject of my personal preferences, it also drives my nuts that when you do get a list of tracks, the top line, IOW the DEFAULT choice is 'Shuffle'. Again, I realise this is a personal preference, but I HATE this as I NEVER shuffle and consider the whole concept quite abhorrent. OK, so that's just me, but it irks that EVERYONE is forced to have this as their default choice, so pick an Artist, pick an Album hit play and you get it shuffled. Aarrrghhhh!
IMO there ought to be a separate shuffle toggle, sited elsewhere in the interface and take it OUT of the track list. It really doesn't belong there. It should NOT be the default choice when you get to the track list. Once again, this is not the way it works in iTunes where there is no 'Shuffle' option in your face for every track list.
Maybe the simplest is to include an option in Settings that allows the user to set Shuffle to NOT display. So those who want it there can have it and those who would NEVER use it, (like me and I suspect many others) would not have to see it and navigate around it at the top of every track list. Hmm, yes, that's the best solution, I like that.
I can feel more feedback coming on:-)

Profit center in Asset Reports

Guys,
Is it possbile to derive profit center field in asset transfer reports or any other trans.report or it will be just on the GL side?
I know in FI document posted for asset reco. accounts ,profit center field is available , but in asset reports can we use some option to show it on the report?? Thanks
Regards
Shaun

Hi Shaun,
Review the attached SAP note which should help.
335065     Include user-defined fields in reports
As per this note it is recommended to use a sort version to see your profit center.
For additional information that may also be of your interest in this subject also have a look at:
439407     User field integration in dynamic selections
Hope this helps.
Brigitte

Add missing column in S_ALR_87011963 but there is no data on it

Hi all,
I added the 'Internal order' field in a sort version used in report S_ALR_87011963 via transaction OAVI.
The column is now being displayed with 'Cost order' as header and there is no data on it.
Can anyone please advise how to solve this problem?
Thanks in advance for your help,
Soumaya

Hi,
I added 2 fields in a sort version used (T.code OAVI).
The first 'Asset Super Number':
Table name: ANLAV
Field Name: ANLUE
And the second 'Internal Order':
Table name: ANLAV
Field Name: CAUFN
The first is displayed in the report S_ALR_87011963 but the second is diplayed but it is empty.
Any idea how to get the data being displayed in this report?
Thanks in advance,
Soumaya

Sort Version

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for