cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Incorrect Totals records in CO09. Where does it come from?

Former Member
0 Kudos

In availability check in CO09 the screen shows an entry for a outbound delivery Total line of 1470 units.

That corresponds to a delivery that does not exists in the system any more as it was deleted. When you double click in another Outbund delivery total record it shows theindividual records, whiles this one does not. Original delivery has been deleted throght vl02n and LIKP and LIPS shows no entries for that delivery.

MD04 showed the same problem, wrong entry for that quantity, what after running RVV05IVB and SDRQCR21 the entry for that delivery dissapeared (honestly, I do not know which one solved that part of the problem).

The entry in CO09 is only rubbish, but I do not know how to get rid of it. Any clues on which tables to check, etc?

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

former_member223981
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Is there an entry in VBBE for the delivery?

Former Member
0 Kudos

No there is no entry in VBBE.

former_member223981
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

SDRQCR21 corrects the VBBE entries, so if there is no VBBE entry, it wont be helpful.

When you say "CO09 is only rubbish", Can you elaborate? Does it actually display information? Or just gibberish?

Normally CO09 would extract the data from VBBE so it seems strange that something is being displayed here. Are you using an APO system?

Former Member
0 Kudos

Yes I should elaborate a little more. And also add some info.

There are two entries in CO09 as "total records". One for customer orders and the other for delivery. If you double click in both they do not "unfold" into the detailed view, as rthe correct "total records do".

We are using APO, but not for availability check as far as I understand. I do not know how to check this in customiz. but when debugging PERFORM AVAILABILITY_CHECK_R3 is used inside LATPCU05 source code.

and inside SAPLATPC / LATPCF0A the CALL FUNCTION 'AVAILABILITY_CHECK_SERVER' function is called with a dest. that is the R3 name...

The information displayed in CO09 correspond to a delivery and order that are not pending. I know only because it fits in quantities, not because tehre is any information that tells me so. The delivery was deleted and the order served with another delivery.

No other order is pending in the system at the moment.

Some trace of my debugging:

For what I see, funnction module CALL FUNCTION 'STOCK_RECEIPT_ISSUE_READ' in SAPLATP0 / LATP0U04 table S_ATPKXI is felt with the wrong data

inside that function module:

  • read sales requirements: individual records

PERFORM vbbe_read.

and after then this little piece of code:

SB_READ VBBE.

...

(a DEFINE I am not so maliar with..)

...

and we get to

IMPORT P_ATPMX FROM SHARED BUFFER ATPSB(AC) ID P_ATPBI. in SAPLATP2 / LATP2FMA

That id contains data that corresopnds to the material. I am not very familiar with this, but I guess it is a sort of buffer normally to avoid extra DB access. If I could just..."delete" that ID....well...just a wild idea.

I hope that helps you to help me.

Shiva_Ram
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

If you double click in both they do not "unfold" into the detailed view, as rthe correct "total records do".

In order to get the individual records, in the material master MRP3 view, in the Availability check field, check the value assigned, and then go to t.code OVZ2, maintain value A under Total Sales and Total DelvReq columns for the material master checking group. Then check again in CO09.

Regards,

Edited by: Shiva Ram on Feb 2, 2012 11:47 AM

former_member223981
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

This sounds like you are using the ATP server. I think transaction acbd is used to correct inconsistencies on the ATP server. See the following SAP notes for more details on ATP Server:

163819: ATP: Transaction ACBD

99999: ATP server: Installation and sizing

Former Member
0 Kudos

acbd corrected the problem.

Thans!!

Answers (1)

Answers (1)

Lakshmipathi
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Check this thread whether it helps you

[Re: Problem in CO09|;

Else check the following note

Note 353845 - Requirements error in deletion of delivery

G. Lakshmipathi