migrating SU24 to new system properly (ecc 5.0 to ecc 6.0)

[Former Member]

Hello,

We are currently upgrading from ECC 5.0 to 6.0. As part of this cutover to the new system, I need to download SU24 properly from the 5.0 system and upload it to the new 6.0 environment because we heavily use SU24 for custom tcodes and to add additional auth objects to SAP delivered transactions.

The good thing is that SU24 has a download capability in the transaction, but the problem is that it gives you three option of downloads, in which all three can be selected.

1) SAP Data

2) Original Data

3) Customer Data

I know that we will obviously want to use the "Customer Data" due to our Ztcodes, but what is the difference between SAP Data and Original Data?

Our goal would be to download and upload only our custom changes (to both custom transactions and SAP transactions), but we do not want to overwrite any newly delivered SU24 updates that SAP may have implemented in ECC 6.0.

Has anyone ever done this or does anyone have an idea what these mean? Of course, the SAP help is useless on this issue.

I looked for such messages and read them here, I guess I still have some anxiety about ensuring that I download only what my company has maintained since our older 5.0 system went live. If I download all of the "Customer Data" option, I think that covers all of our custom transaction codes, but will that cover the auth objects associations to SAP delived tcodes we have made as well?

Also, It seems that I will have to use SU25 to activate. Any information of the best way to to do this our situation would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,

Ryan

[Former Member]

hi,

Please check the below links. It only answers some of your queries. You also need to download and upload the customer data in SU24.

http://help.sap.com/erp2005_ehp_04/helpdata/EN/52/671497439b11d1896f0000e8322d00/frameset.htm

http://help.sap.com/erp2005_ehp_04/helpdata/EN/52/671497439b11d1896f0000e8322d00/content.htm

Regards,

Gowrinadh

[Former Member]

Gowrinadh,

It is already clearly (and rather bluntly) stated that Ryan has read the SAP documentation and OSS notes and not found what he is looking for.

Your persistant posting of more (or less...) randomly related links is not really the intention behind the forum.

Please stop it and assume that the person has done a reasonable search before posting links to help.sap.com - in which case these links should be a reference to some statement from you.... and not just a "link-farm"...

Julius

[Former Member]

Hi Julius,

I post links only in situations where one can't enter the full data. Rather than explaining the full details about SU25 and upgrade activities,which solves the user problem I just pasted the links. As per the past 25 days experience I came to know that only if its useful then only users agrees and allocates points (as per their wish)

I regret the inconvenience caused.

Regards,

Gowrinadh

[Former Member]

Thanks for responding.

The thing is that the person asking the questions does not give a hoot about points until they have an answer, and then only maybe... so forget about points.

Answering questions with random links or wild guesses in the hope that one of them scores a few points makes a big mess of the forums and renders the search almost useless when all these link-farms turn up.

Take a look at this thread for an extreme example =>

It is okay to post a link when there is a good reason for it, embedded within a discussion or to support an answer as a reference.

Please take a look at this thread for a more detailed discussion =>

-

---

Now, back to the discussion...

I am not logged on, but if I remember correctly there is a function module which uses combinations of these three flags to read the SAP data (current SU22 data), the original data (SU22 data without the "update" flag - because in the past SAP rolled out some support pack notes to change SU22 and some customers maintained SU22 anyway instead of SU24...) and the customer data (which is what you are looking for). Additionally the function module parameter has a 4th flag for when nothing is checked, and then it downloads everything (?). The name of the function was something like SU22LISTVALUES but you should be able to find it via the Object Navigator from the download screen - Menu => System => Status => double-click the GUI Screen program. I remember there being lots of comments in the coding as well to help understand it.

But this was some time ago and on a 4.7 system when I had looked into it, so please also check how many entries are downloaded and compare these to your USOBT_C and USOBX_C tables before you do anything like an upload... - as the download might not deliver information you are expecting (assuming that you ran SU25 after making changes or made some changes to SU22 without importing them via support packages, etc).

Let us know what you find. I will take a look in the next days as well when I find a system with some data in it...

Cheers,

Julius

[Former Member]

My apologies for being out of context of the question... however i could not control myself after looking at the workflow thread!!! it is absolutely hillarious!!! OMG!!

That guy is a living TREX system.. is he a google indexing machine?

I apologize Ryan for going out of topic.

[Former Member]

I have no doubt that Gowrinadh's intentions are good and to be helpfull - but we need to avoid the falling into the trap of making the forums less usefull.

As you can see by Murali Poli's points total, that strategy does not work in the long run - because he did not heed the warnings from community members who told him to make more usefull posts.

My apologies to Ryan as well for the little domestic issue in your thread....

Lets continue with the SU22/SU24 consistency and download topic...

As I indicated before, I think the important part is an "update" flag which should not be set, but the report might be considering it (still).

I will check it tomorrow, but for now I found the name of the function with the comments in it in SAP note 1253193 (release 7.00!!) => FM SU2X_LIST_WITH_VALUES

This note and others related to it seem to suggest that you should do the repairs from release 7.00 onwards only.

Perhaps a better option would be to take the SU22 entries with the "update" flag and the change documents from SU24 (if changes were always made in development) and manually add those again to Su24 with the new data in the higher release.

This way, you can try to minimize the upgrade work in SU25 to only that which you want to see, without loosing any custom proposals / settings along the way.

It would be a hard day's work, but probably cleaner in the long run than living with unloaded inconsistencies.

Cheers,

Julius

[Former Member]

Hi Julius,

Good morning. Hopefully this solve the user problem. I have nothing more to add.

Regards,

Gowrinadh

P.S Workflow and the other thread, I am surprised on to see both of them.I am just getting time since past one month to spend here, let me use it for the best. Thanks for the support. Lets build a good community.

[Former Member]

I think I finally figured it out. It took some manual effort, but I think the solution works well for our situation.

I downloaded all Customer Data for all tcodes from the ECC 5.0 system in SU24.

Then I filtered through the USOBT_C table for all entries that were not set initially by "SAP"

I downloaded all customer data for only the tcodes I identified through the filtering process

I then uploaded and ran SU25 step 2 in the new ECC 6.0 System

I then spot checked the modified tcodes in SU24 and compared the values between the systems. The values for all maintained tcodes are equal.

Thanks,

Ryan

[Former Member]

> Then I filtered through the USOBT_C table for all entries that were not set initially by "SAP"

You might want to consider doing the same for USOBT.

As I mentioned before:

> or made some changes to SU22 without importing them via support packages, etc).

... some folks made entries in SU22 during product ramp-ups, correction instructions from SAP which could not wait for a support package and SU24 data had not been transfered, or just a bad habit combined with lots of authorizations.

There is also a clean-up tool which renames the user name field, and does some checks on the system type (SAP or Customer).

Cheers,

Julius