7.0 to 7.1 idoc PROBLEM WITH edi_dc40

[Former Member]

Hello

We are migrating from 7.0 to 7.1 , and we are having problems with flat file to IDOC interfaces,(going to a 4.6C SAP system). The 7.1 system was created from clean and we imported everything as per SAP's instructions.

1. We map a field on all our interfaces to the STDMES field in the EDI_DC40 segment of all our idoc messages. It works in 7.0, and you can see it mapped in the payload on the 7.1 system, but in the target SAP system it is blanked out.

2. When we process several different interfaces at the same time into the 7.1 system (different messages like ORDERS, WMMBXY etc.etc ) the values mapped in the EDI_DC40 segment is getting corrupted somehow when the idoc is created in the target system - for example I have one where the MESCOD from an FIDCC2 idoc is being written to an ORDERS idoc, another where the SNDPRN from one is being written to another idoc. Again all the payloads look good - it's when they arrive in the SAP system they are wrong. When I process the individual interfaces one at a time, the target messages are good (except for the STDMES always being blank)

Thanks

Robert

[JoelTrinidade · Accepted solution]

Hi Robert,

This is a frequently occurring problem whenever migration happens. I read about the similar problem on

http://sap.ittoolbox.com/groups/technical-functional/sap-interfaces/ale-segment-error-861722

Raise a note with sap in meanwhile check for some ale related settings.

Regards

joel

[Former Member]

Hi,

in ID in your reciver IDOC adapter, tick the option Apply control record values from payload and then try again...........

Regards,

Rajeev Gupta

[Former Member]

Hello and thanks for your answers

Rajeev -yes, they have the "take values from payload" box ticked - it only appears to be one field that's not working when I send individual files though, and when I do multiple files it's these fields that are being scrambled.

Joel - thanks for the reference to the other person who does appear to be having the same problem as us.

Regards

Robert

[Former Member]

various patches later, our problem is resolved