SAP landscape & Development question ?

[Former Member]

Hello Experts.

Need a quick suggestion. We have recently added two new systems (DX2 and QA2) to our SAP landscape

DX1 --> QA1 --> PL1 (existing production support)

DX2 -- > QA2 (New project development)

DX2 and QA2 have been created as DB copies of PL1. And a parallel project development effort is under work in DX2  QA2.

*Highlights😘

- We are replicating the changes from production support path manually in DX2 and then releasing to QA2.

- DX2 --> QA2 is the future production support path.

_Problem statement:

- Z* and Y* objectu2019s from the production support path are being prompted for modification with u201Cmodification assistantu201D and a repair task is being generated. (Cause in TADIR table DX1 is still the owner). In my opinion we have two options:

1) In DX2 change the original system to DX2 from existing DX1 using SE03. (Given the fact that DX2 will be an ongoing development box, we would be better off switching the ownership of objects in custom name space - Z* and Y* to DX2)

2) Keep on using modification assistant. However during upgrade Z* (objects in customer name space will also show up as modified with modification assistant)

If we go for option 1, is there a means by which we can do mass change of ownership for Z* and Y* objects.

I am sure I am not the first one to come across this issue. Any experience sharing will be highly helpful.

Thanks.

[Former Member]

Was resolved

[Former Member]

Hello Rohit,

I won't follow either of these 2.

Rather try the following. In DX2 whenever prompted for a transport request to change an object supply it with a local workbench request (without any target). Once the changes have been done and transport needs to be moved assign target to it (workbench request) and release it.

I remember this thing worked till SAP_BASIS (620) but had issues in 640. This was some time back and if I recall correctly the solution I had proposed was around the transport layer ( in the alternative transport route i.e DX2QX2). Unhfortunately I don't recall my solution exactly at the moment. however I think I assigned the same transport layer across both consolidation routes i.e DX1QA1 and DX2-QA2 (in your case).However if you are on 4.7 or lower then the above strategy (local workbech request)should work for you with out issues.

Regards.

Ruchit.

[Former Member]

Hello Ruchit,

Appreciate your quick response .This system is SAP_BASIS 640 (ECC5) . We are not undertaking upgrade now, this release is going to add an additional of business in the existing landscape. All the systems are under the same domain controller . Developers are able to carry out modifications and release to DX2. However they are prompted by u201CModification browseru201D that can be suppressed by turning off modification browser. Even if I use the same transport layer across both consolidation routes its not going to change the source of the objects in custom space.

Thanks.

[Former Member]

Hello Rohit,

In any landscape preferable option is to always have one single system has the owner and not twin systems.

Release to DX2 should not be an issue however making changes in DX2 and releasing to QA2 would be and for that only I have suggested using local workbench transports and then taking care of them later on at the time of release. We worked with this strategy for years quite successfully with out having dual ownership.

You can do other things as well but for me this is the simplest one to follow without having to make any serious changes.

Regards.

Ruchit.