cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Statistic Condition Type inactive when duplicated

mgbernardo
Participant
0 Kudos

Hi gurus,

I wonder if there's any way to make a statistic condition type become inactive when the user inserts another equal one.

Example:

Here is my procedure: ZP0001 with this condition type ZC01 set statistic.

If I create a new sales order and I insert this condition in the procedure twice, the system does NOT deactivate any of them. It just let them occur at the same time.

If I go like this with a non statistic condition type, then the system deactivate all duplicated types and only remains the last one inserted.

Do you know if this behaviour is possible for statistic condition types in any way?

Thanks in advance,

John

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (2)

Answers (2)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

a statistical condition type can not be inactive because it is not taken into account in the calculation per definition as statistical.

One more sentence to clarify to the sentence before. It will be inactive but still displayed - as this is the nature of a statistical condition.

So far so good. But I know exactly what your problem is, when your statistical condition type is present twice you would like to surpress the earlier record.

We had a similar requirment once. We had two different statistical condition types which were displayed at the same time.

The requirement was to only display one of the two condition types. When A was present B should not be shown. I tried with condition exclusion but it did not work for statsitical conditions (as they can not be set inactive...). But it worked very good with a pricing requirement we created ourselves.

Good Luck.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi John,

When you say insert, I assume that your cond type is marked as manual as well apart from being statistical.. ?

1 option is make it non manual and create another ctype as statistical and set condition exclusion to both of them so only one is active at a time.

But, what is your business process where the Cond type is statistical and not allowed twice?

Regards,

Raghu.

mgbernardo
Participant
0 Kudos

Hi Raghu,

Thanks for your answer. It's a client requirement and though it's a statistic condition type, its value is needed for other types calculation (via calculation routine).

The condition type ZC01 is NOT set to manual in the procedure. Sorry I forgot to tell you about that.

I can't see the point of creating another condition type to make an exclusion, that's weird in some way :S

I wonder if there's a flag or a field I can set on customizing to change the type behaviour as I want.

Thanks in advance,

John

Edited by: John Smith on Sep 30, 2011 1:17 PM

Former Member
0 Kudos

John,

if it's not manual..then how is it duplicated? maintained it twice in the pricing procedure definition in V/08?

you can write a requirement to check if one of them is already active..if yes, just deactivate the other.

Regards,

Raghu.

mgbernardo
Participant
0 Kudos

Hi Raghu,

The condition type is not set to manual in the procedure. But you can process it manually since it has the "Manual entry has priority" set on the type properties.

http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/2621/screenshot1754.png

Usually this condition type is determined by a condition record but in many cases the user sets it manually. When this happens, old condition type must be deactivated like happens with a non statistic condition type.

I hope you guys understand me. If you need some more information, please just ask for it

Regards,

John

Former Member
0 Kudos

John, I understand your setup now..like mentioned earlier..you can try writing a requirement routine to de-activate the 'old' one.

Regards,

Raghu.

mgbernardo
Participant
0 Kudos

Thanks mates

Well, the truth is that I could accomplished it by setting the older condition types to inactive at the sales order and invoice user exits.

What I did was set the KINAK field to "Y" (inactive due to consecutive price) at XKOMV.

It works fine, but I would like a better way to do it (preferably by standard options).

I'll try the routine way. Seems a cleaner way to do it. Although I doubt it works for just one condition type.

I'll report you the results

Regards,

John