on 03-30-2010 11:47 AM
Hello,
We are running on R3 46C, affected by the issue detailed in SAP Note 1443908.
We have implemented the corrections in Note 1443908 to prevent future "Week Stats" being lost.
However we would like to rebuild the statistics which were lost due to the bug.
As we only recently found out about this Note via EarlyWatch our retention periods remained the same as before.
Q. Will this affect our ability to rebuild the data?
Also -
The Note 1443908 refers to 945279 as a pre-requisite Note which we do not have implemented.
The Note 945279 is quite large and appears to be time-consuming to implement.
Q. Does 1443908 require only the corrections or all the steps as it mentions "you are not required to change over to the new collection mechanism described in the note.".
The clarity of 1443908 leaves a lot to be desired.
If anyone has any input it would be helpful.
Regards,
Ashley
Edited by: Ashley Day on Mar 30, 2010 12:48 PM
Related Threads
The solution is: the objects inlcluded in SAP Note 945279 ARE pre-requisites for the "rebuild" report included in SAP Note 1443908.
Regards,
Ashley
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Ashley,
I am trying to create the same report 'rebuild_weeks_via_rstotl.txt' . please let me know how you create this report. Please confirm it has to be done via se38.
Also, I found that the report and function mentioned in the note 945279, already exist as the system is on a higher support package. Please comfirm there is no further action required to get the report working.
Thanks,
Sanjay
Hi,
The note 945279 is not a prerequisite for the note 1443908.When you apply the note 1443908 either by applying the correction or importing the relevent Support Package, system calculates and displays the data correctly at least as of the current week. i hope this is clear. Now it is possible that the weekly workload data is missing. The system can recalculate this data from the available daily workload data( You need to create a report using the attached sample code rebuild_weeks_via_rstotl.txt and execute this report once in your system to reconstruct the missing weekly workload data).
When it mentions that Note 945279 is a prerequisite for this subsequent calculation, it means that if you have implemented this note (945279 ) then this weekly calculation is done without you having to create the report from the source code rebuild_weeks_via_rstotl.txt . The sentence "you are not required to change over to the new collection mechanism described in the note" means only that.
Hope it helps.But i agree that the language needs to be improved here. I don`t see any possiblity of any negative effect on rebuilding the data.
Regards,
Jyotish
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hello Jyotish,
I don't think this is correct, we have tried to create the repair report 'rebuild_weeks_via_rstotl.txt' in our Development System and found some of the Data Types to be missing, namely 'SAPWLMTOC1'.
I found this link below with the same issue:
If you read the thread the recommendation is to implement Note 945279.
It appears as though we need to implement this note (945279) if we want the stats data.
Regards
Ashley
User | Count |
---|---|
101 | |
13 | |
13 | |
11 | |
11 | |
7 | |
6 | |
5 | |
4 | |
4 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.