Software Component Dependencies PI 7.1

[Former Member]

Hi experts,

I'm work with SAP NetWeaver PI 7.1 and I have two scenarios with ccBPM to implement an interface from SCV B to SCV A, and another interface from SCV B to SCV A.

For the visibility of metadata between SCV have defined a dependency in SCV A from SCV B. In this way there is no problem to implement BPM Service Interfaces in the SCV A. But now I need to define the dependency of SCV B from SVC A, to implement BPM services interfaces of the SCV B.

The problem when defining the dependence of the SVC B for SVC A the following error message:

Creating dependency from //SXD061/sld/active:SAP_SoftwareComponent.ElementTypeID="01200615320200007523",Name="SAP_APPL",Vendor="sap.com",Version="600" to //SXD061/sld/active:SAP_SoftwareComponent.ElementTypeID="0",Name="SIP",Vendor="roca",Version="2.0" of type InstallationTime would create a circle. Circular dependencies are not allowed.

Any ideas?

Thanks,

Jose.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Patrek,

How could redesign the SWC structures?

My scenario is:

(SWC A is 3rt Party system)

(SWC B is SAP ERP system)

1 - Create Sales Order from SWC A to SWC B with ccBPM (file to BAPI, with file for acknowledge from BAPI response). By convention, the integration process developed in the destination SWC.

--> For not duplicate the metadata in SWC B, define SWC dependecy with SWC A. Perfect, don't create data type's and message type's in SWC B.

2 - Create Invoice from SWC B to SWC A with RFC Lookup in mapping. By convention, the mapping developed in the destination SWC.

--> For not duplicate the metadata in SWC A, define SWC dependency with SWC B... Bad, "Circular dependencies are not allowed". The workaround is import RFC in SWC A that is not SAP System.

I would like to find a consistent organization and that facilitate the maintenance, but I could not. Any ideas?

Thanks,

Jose.

[stefan_grube · Accepted solution]

You could have a seperate SWVC for your BPM, where you put all abstract interfaces and mappings.

This is represented the same way, when you have an integration scenario. You have swimlanes for the application systems and a swimlane for the BPM.

Regards

Stefan

[mayur_patel6 · Accepted solution]

Hello Stefan, I have a similar problem i.e. I have three scvs

SWCV 1 ( third party)

- Abstract Interfaces

SWCV 2 ( MAPPER)

- Holds MM and OM

SWCV 3 (SRM)

- IDoc abstract Service interfaces

I am thinking of making SWCV 2 dependent on 1 and 3. And, still have my abstract interfaces in 1 and 3. But have my Integration Processin SWCV 2. Do you think this is a good idea? We have divided our ESR objects on Sender, Mapper, Receiver form.

[Former Member]

Hi Stefan,

Ok, it's an interesting idea to hold the integration process objects in a separate SWC. But, if we raise the same scenario but with a different design:

1 - Create Sales Order from SWC A to SWC B with JDBC Lookup in mapping. By convention, the mapping developed in the destination SWC (in B).

--> For not duplicate the metadata in SWC B, define SWC dependecy with SWC A. Perfect, don't create data type's and message type's in SWC B.

2 - Create Invoice from SWC B to SWC A with RFC Lookup in mapping. By convention, the mapping developed in the destination SWC (in A).

--> For not duplicate the metadata in SWC A, define SWC dependency with SWC B... Bad, "Circular dependencies are not allowed". The workaround is import RFC in SWC A that is not SAP System.

My goal is to view the cases where it seems to me that the decision to organize the objects in this way in ESR has small disadvantages. Does anyone know a site that explains best-practice on this subject?

Best regards,

Jose.

[prateek]

The dependency should be created only one way. From A to B or vice versa. In your case, you should redesign the SWC structures.

Regards,

Prateek