HELP!!!! SAP Archving: Arching criteria on table without date column

[Former Member]

Hi Expert

We are using SAP ERP 2004 (FI/CO/SD/MM) and implementing SAP arching (standard SARA) for FI documents and MM documents. I am urgently in need of expert's opinion and advice.

When we do arching testing for PO (purchasing oder docoument), we noticed following tables are also archived.

Archving object: MM_EKKO

- ADR13

- ADR2

- ADR3

- ADR6

- ADR7

- ADRCOMC

- ADRCT

- ADRU

- ADRV

- ADRVP

- STXH

- STXL

May I know the followings?

1) If I see the table "ADR2", "ADR6", the table has date column, but the all date is set "0001.01.01", with what criteria does SAP archive these data? We specifiy period for archiving.

2) Are "ADR2", "ADR6" master data or transactional data"?

3) If I want to exclude "ADR2", "ADR6", is there any configuration to exclude these tables? They are included in achiving object "MM_EKKO".

Thank you

Koji

[JL23 · Accepted solution]

if you enter a delivery address in a PO manually, then a record in central address managment is created.

When you archive the PO, then only those address records get archived that belongs to this individual PO.

The date in address records is not yet in use.

you can see this in SE11 at table ADRC in the short description to field DATE_FROM

Central address managment is master data and transactional data.

It is not something individual, you cannot archive addresses seperately.

the address records get archived together with the corresponding data record.

Why would you exclude certain records from ADR2 and ADR6 , they are of no use if the corresponding record (e.g. PO) is archived.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

I am wondering if the data in ADR 2 or 6 is reused by other document (PC, sales order). If such a case, there will be inconsistancy after archving? There is no worry like this? So in my case, does one address only belongs to one PO?

Regards

Koji

[JL23 · Accepted solution]

SAP differentiates between referencing an exisiting address and having a document specific address

An address that belongs to a master data object like a customer master is certainly not archivied together with a purchase order if used there, because the address group identifies that the address does not belong to the PO.

I do not say that the archiving programs are error free, there are too many OSS notes with programm fixes that tell you a different story like Note 1424810 - Address tables are inconsistently deleted during archiving

Hence it is your job to make sure that you have the most recent OSS notes applied before you start with archiving, and even then you should do spot checks if everything was archived as expected. However the vast majority of errors will be exposed in daily processes.

Nevertheless I am satisfied with the programs in general an do not really fear that the archving programs delete too much.

Always remember that you are not a frontrunner in archiving purchase orders. This maybe different if you become a pilot for a new archiving object.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hello Koji,

The information provided by Jurgen is correct. If you still have questions, the best thing to do is to test an archiving object in a sandbox system. Archive a small amount of data (even just 1 PO) and do a before and after check of the relevant tables to see exactly what data is being archived.

Also, when posting further questions, please follow the [rules of engagement |https://wiki.sdn.sap.com/wiki/display/HOME/RulesofEngagement] . Specifically around your subject line. The HELP!!!!! is not a good way to start a subject line.

Thank you,

Karin Tillotson