XRPM implementation strategy

Can some one help me to answer the following qustions?
1. Do we need to really follow up DEV, QA and PRD system landscape for implementing xRPM? I will be very glad if some of you could share your real time experience
2. I know that SAP BW is a pre-requisite for installing xRPM. In this case, do we need BW expertize to customize some of the reports in xRPM?
Thanks and Regards,
Tamil Mohan S

Hi,
1) It's all depends on customer budget. Any how it is always required for integration testing & Can conclude as it is required.
2) SAP_BW Component is not pre-requisite for installing the same & we need not need BW resource xRPM implementation.
Regarding the installation of CPRXRPM 400 system
1) Installation SAP Netweaver 2004s ABAP System installation, which by default contains 4 application s/w components inlcuding SAP_BW
SAP_ABAP, SAP_BASIS, SAP_BW, PI_BASIS
In fact every ABAP system contains SAP_BW compoent.
Hope this info helps.
Regards

Similar Messages

Implementation strategy for non sap sources

hai friends,
could anyone help with the
'implementation strategy for non sap sources'.

Hi,
Its the same as with R3 sources.Only difference is you'll have different underlying interfaces. Non SAP systems can either be flat files, ETL systems or legacy systems using ETL connection, Oracle or Java systems XML, etc.
But your stategy would remain the same only per your non sap source system, the transactions and the ways you configure your datasources would differ.
Cheers,
Kedar

OWB 10gR2 - Implementation Strategy

I am trying to find what is the best strategy to install and configure a OWB environment for the following scenario on one linux server machine:
There are three Oracle databases on this machine:
database 1 = OWB repository owned by a owb_owner schema. The repository will contain all of design metadata (Source Oracle module with source tables, Target "Oracle module A" with tables, sequences, mappings and Target "Oracle module B" with tables, sequences, mappings). The ETL process is setup to transform data in two stages: 1> Source to target A 2> Target A to target B
database 2 = It will have target schema Target_A. The contents of "Oracle Module A" from the OWB repository in database 1 needs to be deployed to this "target_A" schema
database 3 = It will have target schema Target_B. The contents of "Oracle Module B" from the OWB repository in database 1 needs to be deployed to this "target_B" schema
Do I need to have OWB repository installed in database 2 and database 3 and have control center service running in each of them to facilitate execution of ETL process?
Deployment of the objects will be launched from a windows workstation via client design center / control center manager. Do I need to have control service running from client machine to facilitate deployment ? If so, would it facilitate deployment of the objects to the above two targe schemas ?
The intent is to have a process flow in OWB metadata repository of database 1 streamline the complete ETL process tied to a location owned by OWF_MGR schema in database1.
Please advice what implementation strategy will work best for the scenario. I read strategy presented in http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B31080_01/doc/install.102/b28224.pdf .. BUT I need more clarity on the available options.

Hi.
you will need a unified repository in each database. The unified repository in OWB 10GR2 contains both the objects for the design repository (your mappings, tables etc.) and the control center repository (runtime and deployment information such as execution times of mappings etc.). In previous versions of OWB they were separate.
Database 1: Install the unified repository and just use it as your design repository. You will use this when you log in via Designer.
Database 2: Install unified repository together with Control Center Service and use as control center repository.
Database 3: Install unified repository together with Control Center Service and use as control center repository.
While it is possible to have the Control Center Service just run on a client machine , I ran into all sorts of problems in the past with this configuration, e.g. when you log off your client machine it shuts down the Control Center Service. From my experience this setup is not very stable.
In OWB Designer you can then set up locations and configurations to deploy your mappings to database 2 or database 3.
You will need owf_mgr on both database 2 and database 3 and you need to deploy your process flows to both databases. What you can't do is to run a process flow say from database 1 or database 2 across databases 2 and 3.
Can you explain in some more detail why you have a requirement to transform data across two target servers?
Regards
Uli

How to implement Strategy pattern in ABAP Objects?

Hello,
I have a problem where I need to implement different algorithms, depending on the type of input. Example: I have to calculate a Present Value, sometimes with payments in advance, sometimes payment in arrear.
From documentation and to enhance my ABAP Objects skills, I would like to implement the strategy pattern. It sounds the right solution for the problem.
Hence I need some help in implementing this pattern in OO. I have some basic OO skills, but still learning.
Has somebody already implemented this pattern in ABAP OO and can give me some input. Or is there any documentation how to implement it?
Thanks and regards,
Tapio

Keshav has already outlined required logic, so let me fulfill his answer with a snippet
An Interface
INTERFACE lif_payment.
METHODS pay CHANGING c_val TYPE p.
ENDINTERFACE.
Payment implementations
CLASS lcl_payment_1 DEFINITION.
PUBLIC SECTION.
INTERFACES lif_payment.
ALIASES pay for lif_payment~pay.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS lcl_payment_2 DEFINITION.
PUBLIC SECTION.
INTERFACES lif_payment.
ALIASES pay for lif_payment~pay.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS lcl_payment_1 IMPLEMENTATION.
METHOD pay.
    "do something with c_val i.e.
    c_val = c_val - 10.
ENDMETHOD.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS lcl_payment_2 IMPLEMENTATION.
METHOD pay.
    "do something else with c_val i.e.
    c_val = c_val + 10.
ENDMETHOD.
Main class which uses strategy pattern
CLASS lcl_main DEFINITION.
PUBLIC SECTION.
    "during main object creation you pass which payment you want to use for this object
    METHODS constructor IMPORTING ir_payment TYPE REF TO lif_payment.
    "later on you can change this dynamicaly
    METHODS set_payment IMPORTING ir_payment TYPE REF TO lif_payment.
    METHODS show_payment_val.
    METHODS pay.
PRIVATE SECTION.
    DATA payment_value TYPE p.
    "reference to your interface whcih you will be working with
    "polimorphically
    DATA mr_payment TYPE REF TO lif_payment.
ENDCLASS.
CLASS lcl_main IMPLEMENTATION.
METHOD constructor.
    IF ir_payment IS BOUND.
      me->mr_payment = ir_payment.
    ENDIF.
ENDMETHOD.
METHOD set_payment.
    IF ir_payment IS BOUND.
      me->mr_payment = ir_payment.
    ENDIF.
ENDMETHOD.
METHOD show_payment_val.
    WRITE /: 'Payment value is now ', me->payment_value.
ENDMETHOD.
"hide fact that you are using composition to access pay method
METHOD pay.
    mr_payment->pay( CHANGING c_val = payment_value ).
ENDMETHOD.                   ENDCLASS.
Client application
PARAMETERS pa_pay TYPE c. "1 - first payment, 2 - second
DATA gr_main TYPE REF TO lcl_main.
DATA gr_payment TYPE REF TO lif_payment.
START-OF-SELECTION.
"client application (which uses stategy pattern)
CASE pa_pay.
    WHEN 1.
      "create first type of payment
      CREATE OBJECT gr_payment TYPE lcl_payment_1.
    WHEN 2.
      "create second type of payment
      CREATE OBJECT gr_payment TYPE lcl_payment_2.
ENDCASE.
"pass payment type to main object
CREATE OBJECT gr_main
    EXPORTING
      ir_payment = gr_payment.
gr_main->show_payment_val( ).
"now client doesn't know which object it is working with
gr_main->pay( ).
gr_main->show_payment_val( ).
"you can also use set_payment method to set payment type dynamically
"client would see no change
if pa_pay = 1.
    "now create different payment to set it dynamically
    CREATE OBJECT gr_payment TYPE lcl_payment_2.
    gr_main->set_payment( gr_payment ).
    gr_main->pay( ).
    gr_main->show_payment_val( ).
endif.
Regads
Marcin

Xrpm Implementation in a Global Scenario

Hi,
I am trying to understand a Global implementation scenario for xrpm.
If I have 2 regions with SAP implemented on seperate instances and I want to implement xrpm 4.0
Except for the fact that we have to consider sizing .
The business scenario we are thinking is If my company has a Best shore model and we want to look at available resources from all regions for a project I have to staff in the US .
If I have a different xrpm installation per instance I will not have access to the portfolios,financials outside of my region nor the resource pool in a different region.
This is a very typical scenario I would think,how is this addressed or implemented
Is it a good idea to implement one xrpm globally for all regions(2 in my case) or have a seperate installation per R/3 instance.
We thought about Master Data Synchronization issues if we have one global xrpm which would add something like MDM into the landscape..
Thanks
Shilpa

Hi Shilpa,
I don't think this is the correct (sub)forum for your question(s).
As you've already created the very same thread on the xApps forum, I would like to close this thread in the MaxDB/liveCache forum, or do you have any MaxDB/liveCache specific questions in mind?
Regards,
Roland

SAP implementation Strategy

Dear All,
I like to have your suggestion in the below issue:
Currently i am handling Implementation process in a UTILITY org. The organisation structure includes One Corp office , 5 Hydel Generation Units, One Pump Storage unit , 105 Divisional offices , 5 zonal offices and around 75 Sub station.
Divisional offices reports to Zonal office in turn Zonal office reports to Corp. Office
Organisation has already implemented IS utility which caters Customer meter reading and Billing in periodic cycle.
Organisation having legacy system which follows age old Financial Accounting System which having more than 1200 GL Codes.
This age old legacy system is going to be replaced by SAP system.
We have proposed reduction of GL codes based on Standard SAP requirements due to which so many GL codes have been reduced .
As the organisation yet to decide the GO live strategy. As the area is big it is suggested go live in Phase manner.
If we go for phase manner the expected problem will be in synchronization between SAP reporting & Legacy reporting. Because SAP will use reduced no. of GL codes whereas others will be maintaining their Legacy System ( with old GL codes).
Now my question to my friends / SAP Guru's how this situation can be handled in proper fashion with your kind guidance .

Dear Tapas,
As far as I know reconciliation account and special G/L account concepts can help you in this issue.
You can define for example a vendor account and a reconsiliation account for. Then you can have some speciall G/L accounts which are related to this vendor. You can connect these accounts through special G/L indicator to vendor master record.
In fact in this way you will have just a G/L account for each vender that will be as a reconcilation account.
Regards,
Omid

General Persistence Implementation Strategy Question

Hi,
I want to implement a J2EE application and use a persistence system like Hibernate. I will have to create several beans and set-up my ORM properly. Now, if I create an Enterprise project in NetBeans, where should I put my Peristence code? In a Web container or in a EBJ container knowing that both JSP pages and EJB will refer to my persisted beans? Or should I create another separate project and include the corresponding .jar in both my Web or EJB containers?
What is the best strategy?
Thanks,
J.

Jrm wrote:
Hi,
I want to implement a J2EE application and use a persistence system like Hibernate. I will have to create several beans and set-up my ORM properly. Now, if I create an Enterprise project in NetBeans, where should I put my Peristence code? In a Web container or in a EBJ container +
knowing that both JSP pages and EJB will refer to my persisted beans+? I would say that JSPs should not be contacting your database directly. Better to go through a well-defined service layer that hides the persistence layer. All security, binding, and validation issues should be resolved before the service layer is called.
Or should I create another separate project and include the corresponding .jar in both my Web or EJB containers?Both? Wrong.
%

Firefighter Implementation Strategy

Hello All,
We are implementing Firefighter in our landscape, and we want that all changes in SAP system should be done with Firefighter, but to reduce the usage of Firefighter we would be using our existing normal users for Daily Checks and monitoring without any change.
To do this, we need role/s which can be used for executing most of the Basis transactions with DISPLAY access only.
Appreciate if you can share such roles OR recommend whats the best strategy for implementing Firefighter.
Regards
Davinder

Davinder,
Once again, this really depends on your organisation but especially on their ability to review the logs generated.
Most people tend to use Firefighter for just temporary elevated access in emergency scenarios. The expecation is that it is only used infrequently and therefore, the logs that are generated are reviewed in detail by the controllers.
As I'm sure you have noticed, the tool is much more powerful than that but using it as a blanket control for all system changes means that you will be innundating your controllers with logs. This actually weakens the control as they are much more likely to miss critical activities due to the volume of data being sent to them.
I would assess what you actually think is a critical change and design Firefighter scenarios to fit those. You can then also use that as a mechanism to remove critical access from business as usual roles citing Firefighter as a more controlled approach.
You can tailor the scenarios to different tiers eg. Emergency and then a subset of sensitive transactions (e.g. SCC4 / SARA with delete) but it must be lead by the business requirements for what is the overall risk to the system.
Simon

Implement strategy for ASA on TACACS w/ restricted read-only access

An ASA5550 will need to be configured to use TACACS AAA. Currently, the ASA is setup for local authentication. A couple of privilege 15 admin users and a few more privilege 5 read-only users.
ASA 5550
running ASA 8.2(2)
using ASDM 6.3(5)
authenticating to ACS 4.2
The admin users and read-only users already have established TACACS usernames and are in established TACACS user groups for logging into routers/switches.
What's the best way to implement configuration of the ASA and ACS server to maintain the same type of restrictions that's applied using the local database?
1. Try and avoid the creation of a second TACACS username for the admin and read-only users.
2. ACS allows restrictions on what devices can be access by users/groups. Possible to do reverse? Restrict what usernames can access a device in the ACS database.

If you want to configure ASA for read-only access via tacacs then you have to do the following task
ASA/PIX/FWSM Configuration
In addition to your preset configuration, these commands are required on ASA/PIX/FWSM in order to implement command authorization through an ACS server:
    aaa-server authserver protocol tacacs+
    aaa-server authserver host 10.1.1.1
    aaa authorization command authserver
On the ACS, you need to create command authorization set for only SHOW commands:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/secursw/ps2086/products_configuration_example09186a00808d9138.shtml#scenario2
Associate command authorization set with user or group
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/secursw/ps2086/products_configuration_example09186a00808d9138.shtml#asso2
Regards,
Jatin
Do rate helpful posts-

Defining System Landscape in Implementation Project

Hi
I want to ask about defining System Landscape of an implementation project in solution manager.
I have assigned the logical Component in Systems tab.
I want to ask about creating the IMG Project in Sstems Landscape tab,, Is it compulsory to create IMG project for the new Implementation Project??? Why we create IMG Project?? Is it compulsory??
Please guide
Regards
Sidra Hasan

Hi,
Implementation Project u2013 A project to implement SAP solution as a part of regular implementation or a roll out. This is considered for single-site implementations. Predefined scenarios can be selected from template projects.
It is not compulsory to create these projects in solution manager that depends upon your implementation strategy.
Thanks
Sunny

Strategy pattern question.

Can the following scenario be called strategy pattern?
public class StrategyExecutor {
     public static void main(String[] args) {
          Strategy[] strategies = {new FirstImpl(), new SecondImpl()};
          for(int i = 0; i < strategies.length; i++){
               System.out.print("Strategy ["+ i +"] ");
               strategies.solve();
public interface Strategy {
     public void solve();
public abstract class AbstractClass implements Strategy{
     public void solve(){
          int result = getFirstParam()+getSecondParam();
          System.out.println(" Result "+result);
     protected abstract int getSecondParam();
     protected abstract int getFirstParam();
public class FirstImpl extends AbstractClass {
     protected int getSecondParam() {
          return 22;
     protected int getFirstParam() {
          return 11;
public class SecondImpl extends AbstractClass {
     protected int getSecondParam() {
          return 44;
     protected int getFirstParam() {
          return 33;

To be a perfect fit for Strategy pattern, if the abtract class which has the template to solve() is not there and the actual algorithm is down in the FIrstImpl, SecondImpl then its a true strategy?
Design point of view it can be a strategy pattern..
but If you see from the the context and the programs
objective, It is not strategy pattern

Entity Object's "addNewRow" Permission, how to implement?

Hi,
this is a generic question about an implementation strategy to be followed for ADF Authorization.
I've been researching the definition of permissions at the entity object level, and successfully tested the 3 permission targets available: read, update, removeCurrentRow.
However, I'd actually need the full set of permission targets for CRUD operations, which means that ADF lacks an "addNewRow" to secure row creation on EOs.
What should be the strategy to implement that?
Is it a planned feature so waiting till, say, 11g Release 2 should bring it to the table, or has it been left out by design and thus it just won't be added? In the latter case, how to actually implement it?
I'd need to actually hide/disable the Create/CreateInsert button on my edit pages if the underlying EO does not allow new row creation for the current role. I gave a thought to EO's Custom Properties as a way to handle that extra permission flag, but is it a viable way? Can they be accessed through EL so that I can, say, use them directly in the Rendered/Disabled property of the button to regulate access?
Or would you suggest another strategy altogether?
Please share your ideas.
thanks,
RickyS

Well, I can definitely see some benefits in having security at the model layer, at least in our scenario. In a complex app with many edit pages often dealing multiple times with the same EOs, having to specify a single set of policies on the EO itself and see it automatically implemented on every page seems a plus and a step ahead from 10g - not that I tried Security in 10g, but I know the approach. Seeing fields automatically become read-only or datacontrol operation buttons such as Delete become disabled without specifying anything on the page is cleaner and will speed up development a bit, too (for large numbers of pages that might be significant, on a small app it's probably irrelevant).
Probably not as useful and powerful as model-driven lists, but still a welcome feature. You probably have a point about the double mainteinance, but that may be avoided if the BC layer security truly encompasses everything (e.g. if I can't rely on a "create" permissions, I'll certainly have to maintain additional code as well as additional BC data such as custom properties to deal with that, and this is even worse).
Another point is that I might want to enable/disable functionality on the page via EL/backing bean based on BC permissions, and that seems useful. Being able to express a condition like "this EO is accessible" or "this attribute is accessible" is sometimes much superior to "user belongs to this role". It's better to decouple roles from the secured targets and just use the latter, IMHO. Especially becuse we'll likely won't have a fixed set of static roles defined in advance for all customers we'll deploy our webapp to.
Just my 2 cents, anyway, you might end up being totally right :-)
Cheers,
RickyS

Pattern Strategy and generics

Hi there !
I'm trying to implements a strategy pattern by using generics.
That is my attempt for the abstract part :
public interface Strategy<C extends Compound> {
        public abstract void apply(final C c);
    public abstract class Compound {
        Strategy<? super Compound> strategy;
        public void setStrategy(Strategy<? super Compound> strategy) {
            this.strategy = strategy;
        public final void move() {
            this.strategy.apply(this);
    }But when I want to use it :
    public class AStrategy implements Strategy<ACompound> {
        public void apply(ACompound compound) {
            return;
    public class ACompound extends Compound {
        public ACompound(AStrategy strategy) {
            // setStrategy(Strategy<? super Compound>) in Compound cannot be applied to (AStrategy)
            this.setStrategy(strategy); // BOOM !
    }So I think that I don't use correctly the wildcards and bounds ... What's wrong ?
Thanks

Sorry not to really offer an actual explanation...I'm not sure I could get one right, so I'll leave that to an actual Expert!
But here's another way of writing that example. It's maybe more heavyweight than what you want (and maybe also you'll get more replies telling you all the reason why it's a Bad Approach!), but it will compile for you.
interface Strategy<S extends Strategy<S,C>, C extends Compound<S,C>>   {
        public abstract void apply(final Compound<S,C> c);
abstract class Compound<S extends Strategy<S,C>, C extends Compound<S,C>> {
        Strategy<S,C> strategy;
        public void setStrategy(Strategy<S,C> strategy) {
            this.strategy = strategy;
        public final void move() {
            this.strategy.apply(this);
    }The basic idea is that Strategy and Compound define a way for two classes to relate to each other. If you declare classes XXX and YYY (respectively) to be a Strategy/Compound relationship, then you know that all of the business relating to Compound in XXX should actually be about YYY. It's just the same thing as knowing you get a String out of an Iterator<String>, except that it goes back and forth between two different classes. So your two concrete classes become:
class AStrategy implements Strategy<AStrategy, ACompound> {
        public void apply(Compound<AStrategy, ACompound> compound) {
            return;
class ACompound extends Compound<AStrategy, ACompound> {
        public ACompound(AStrategy strategy) {
            this.setStrategy(strategy); // BOOM !
    }Of course, overusing this leads to amazingly long type variable lists.

Global SAP HR Implementation

Hello Forum,
I am in a situation of planning implementation strategy for Global SAP HR implementation across 30 counties.
Process to be implemented
1. Performanace management
2. Hiring and firing
3. Payroll
4. Manage Employee Info.
5. Recruting
6. ESS
7. MSS
etc.
I am wondering if some one can reply following queries with above inputs
1. The cutover approach and principles
2. The data conversion sequence
3. List the interim processes required
4. Expected resources to support implementation
Thanks in advance.
Sanjay

Hi,
I hv worked with World's largest SAP HCM implementaion.
Certain points from my side..
1.The cutover approach and principles
Best is to start with a country where less number of population.(For first go live)
Maintain separate testing team for SIT also.
Adhere to global implementation strategies and unique terminologies in all countries (Config part)
2. The data conversion sequence
Maintain a separate team for data conversion and data cleansing should be the job of client. You can use different methods for uploading data for different countries (Eg: only for US Specific we have DTT tool etc.)
3. List the interim processes required
4. Expected resources to support implementation
Respect on the implementation approach.
Up to how many countries and you are planning to go live on the same date (Parallel implementation)?
Or you are planning as a sequence of rollouts etc.
Regards
Thomas.
Edited by: Thomas Padiyara on Jul 29, 2008 4:50 AM
Edited by: Thomas Padiyara on Jul 30, 2008 8:48 AM

Self-Mutation With Strategy Pattern

I have a class whose behaviour changes with state. The current behaviour is determined by a Strategy object. Often, after a given Strategy executes, it needs to change the object's active strategy, so that on the next call a new Strategy will be called. The sample class below illustrates this concept, compiles, and works.
public class Test {
     public static void main (String[] args) {
          Test t = new Test();
          t.doIt();
          t.doIt();
          t.doIt();
     private Strategy mStrategy = new Strategy1();
     public void doIt() {
          mStrategy.doIt();
     interface Strategy {
          public void doIt();
     private class Strategy1 implements Strategy {
          public void doIt() {
               mStrategy = new Strategy2();
//Is the currently executing object now susceptible to garbage collection???
               System.out.println("Executing Strategy1");
     private class Strategy2 implements Strategy {
          public void doIt() {
               mStrategy = new Strategy1();
               System.out.println("Executing Strategy2");
}But question is: Is it safe? It seems that, where the code is marked with a comment, the currently executing strategy is no longer referred to by mStrategy, and so could possibly be garbage collected?
Or is this perfectly legal, because the collector will not collect an object which is still executing code?
Thanks for any explanation,
John

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like a lot
of overhead to create a new object and have the old
object garbage collected just to change strategies.No, you're not missing anything.... I could of course store the two strategies as member variables and switch in the appropriate one.
I just did it that way because in my app the strategy objects themselves have a state which needs to be reset when they are made active. Since they aren't switched very often, it's easier just to create new ones rather than add resetState() methods to the strategy objects...
Anyway, I agree with your point.
Thanks again,
J

XRPM implementation strategy

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for