Error in Update Rule migration using "Create Transformation"

[Former Member]

Hi gurus,

We are encountering errors in the migration of our 2LIS_03_BF and 2LIS_03_BX update rules into a transformation via URs Context Menu Additional functions - > Create transformation

This action creates a new transformation, but is only generating very little Routine assignements in our KF fields. That is, some KF have their old ABAP converted automatically into ABAP OO while the rest (majority) of KF fields have no rule (routine) assigned at all.

However, the most surprising thing is that after executing the "Create Transformation", the log shows everything correct and warnings (message 652 "Routine created. Verify sintax").

Have you ever faced this problem?

Is the automatic migration tool working correctly?

If not, do we need to manually create all those KF routines that have not been correctly been migrated? Even after two years since new dataflow that was released?

We are on SP 15...

Thanks and best regards,

Enric

[Former Member]

Hi Enric,

I did a migration of a update rule into a transformation via "Context Menu Additional functions - > Create transformation" too, and all the KF's routines were placed on the Transformation's Start Routine.

Anyway i had to do the transformation manually because we need to see the lines between our Source Object and our Target Object, so i can´t tell you if the transformation works.

Hope this helps.

[Former Member]

Hi Juanjo,

In fact, if I understand you correctly, I'm facing the same situation: all FORMS based on OLD individual KFs routine are now available in the global transformation routine in ABAP OO, but what I'm missing is the individual source to target KF field mapping to routine, where the method with the perform to each coding should be done.

Shall I understand this is a common bug? Manual correction proposed?

Thanks,

Enric

[former_member205352]

Had you used Return table concept.This wont get migrated you need to write code for this in ABAP OO.

This is one exception during migration, there may be others too.

Hope this helps.

Edited by: Praveen G on Oct 2, 2008 3:59 AM

[Former Member]

No, what we are trying to migrate are, in fact, routines placed on each field assignment in the UR, with no start Routine or Return table being used.

Best regards,

Enric

[Former Member]

Hi Enric,

Yes, We are in the same situation, i didnt find a way to make an "automatic" Transformation from a UR that includes the fields mapping between both obejcts, maybe the generated transformation works, but i didnt test it because our users need to see the mappings lines, however if you find a way to make a Transformation from a UR with the fields mapping, please share it.

Thanks

Juanjo.