Search Strategy of Access Sequence

[Former Member]

Hi,

I know the search strategy of Access Sequence in Pricing that it follows from the "Most Specific" to "Most Generic". But in this case I found that the step number is directing the Most generic one first and the Most specific one last.

No Table Description

1 879 Sold-to/Material

2 880 Hierarchy/Material

3 880 Hierarchy/Material

4 867 Sales org./Division/Final cust/SalesDocTy/Material

5 965 Sales org./Division/Sold-to/SalesDocType/Material

8 868 Sales org./Division/SalesDocTy/Final cust/Sales #

9 834 Sales org./Division/SalesDocTy/Hierarchy/Sales #

10 834 Sales org./Division/SalesDocTy/Hierarchy/Sales #

11 966 Sales org./Division/SalesDocType/Cust.group/Material

Please help me in understanding the Search strategy.

Thanks,

Jans

[former_member365422]

Dear Jans,

I think "Most Specific" to "Most Generic" is the rule we should follow while defining access sequence.

System will only follow what you have defined.

In your example it seems you defined the Accesses in reverse order that is most generic appears first and specific appears last.

System will try to find the condition record in sequence of access no. irrespective to whether it is specific or generic

If exclusive indicator is checked then system picks the condition record of the access which ever it found first in the sequence again irrespective to specific or generic.

Regards

Mayank

[Former Member]

Hi All,

Thank you all of you for your reply and effort. I have clearly mentioned that I know the search Stratagy from "Most Specific" to "Most generic". But in this case, the scenario is given from the production and it is running for more than one year.

I was confused by the search number by which it is forcing to follow most generic First and most Specific last. Bye the bye in all the condition tables "Exclusive" buton is ticked. This also I know and I did not want to bother on this issue.

My concern that the search strategy works on the basis of Step number we fix not on the theory that from "Most Specific" to "Most generic".

That way Mayank has told the correct thing. It is a new experience and I am trying to grasp yhis idea how this Pricing is working.

Once again thanks to everybody.

Regards,

Jans

[Former Member]

Hello Jans,

system always search from "most specific" to "most genaral".

provided that you made relevant settings for the system to do so,which are to be made while craeting the access sequence.

there when you insert the tables just click on the "exclusive" indicator ,it is this indicator that instructs the system to search from "most specific to "most general".

if for ex. in table 879 there must have been a condition record for this where sold to is" x "and material is "y",

now if there is a sales order satisfying this requirement that is if customer "x" orders for material"y" then in this case system will no longer serach for tables beyond the table 879 and will stop its search and will populate the price stored in table 879 in to the order.

Another reason for this funtionality is that these "indicators" in the access seq of a condition type improves the system performance by not letting system serach for unnecessaary tables.

revert if helpful

Mohit Singh

[Former Member]

hi jans,

you are 100% right in this regard.

the step number plays an important role here in defining condition tables in the sequence of order.

for Eg: here in this example you have given from 1 to 11 tables.

if you re assign it as like this also then 1,3,4,5,6,7,2,8,10,11,9 - hit enter, then system basing on the THUMB RULE called

"Most Specific" to "Most Generic" it will rearrange the same as 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 - tables.

this happens automatically after pressing enter.

hope this clears your issue.

balajia

[Lakshmipathi]

To the best of my knowledge, system will always give priority to "Most Specific" to "Most Generic".

In your case, if it is not happening, check in V/07 whether the "Exclusive" box is selected for all those combinations.

thanks

G. Lakshmipathi

[former_member183879]

Hi Jans,

It is not even the other way round. The series of condition tables in this A.S is mixed up. I even see some fields being used in multiple tables and assigned in a single seq which is not necessary.

You can use only those condition tables which use fields which are mutually exclusive but completely exhaustive. Only then it will be effective. In such a scenario, if you carefully observe, most specific to most generic will lead to unique record and the other way round will always lead to duplicate records. In that case, it is useful to make it most specific to most generic.

In this situation, i see that some of the tables are not even needed. For example, 876 and 867. Also I dont know what field is the label Sales represent in tables 834 and868. In general I dont think it is maintained in optimal way. It can be thought of and a better sequence can be maintained.