10-04-2011 1:51 PM
Hello all,
We have a need to restrict MM02 by field "Storage Bin" (MARD-LGPBE).
I have been able to restrict by things like Sales Org and Plant via the org values and changing M_MATE_WRK, but I am unsure whether it is even possible to make a restriction this granular without creating a custom version of the authorization? They want MARD restricted down to one plant.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
10-04-2011 6:49 PM
or make that storage bin field as org field but this is good during project phase but not advisable for production support issues as alrealy lot of roles might be there with this storage bin field as authorization field and this involves modification all those roles
10-04-2011 2:51 PM
You cannot restrict it on individual fields. Material Master can be restricted on the various views and the related organizational levels. (See the various M_MATE.... objects, such as M_MATE_LGN Material Master: Warehouse Numbers).
If you want to restrict on individual fields, there are I believe two options:
- in the customization of a new material type you can indicate which fields in the material master are: mandatory, optional or visible
- using a custom made authorization object in combination with a user exist. ( a developer should be able to indicate which user exists are available).
10-04-2011 3:27 PM
Another option is building a custom app that will use standard API to maintain material. In this case there is BAPI which can be used to maintain material master. This solution is pretty flexible because you can add additional layer of business logic (e.g. additional authorization checks). Obviously, it introduces all issues linked to custom development.
Cheers
10-04-2011 6:49 PM
or make that storage bin field as org field but this is good during project phase but not advisable for production support issues as alrealy lot of roles might be there with this storage bin field as authorization field and this involves modification all those roles
10-19-2011 1:21 PM
Solved: Thanks for all the helpful replies!
We were able to solve the issue through a combination of me restricting S_QUERY, and the BA utilizing transaction SHD0 to create a transactional variant.