04-23-2013 5:12 AM
During PR(account assessment category is P), We have to put in commitment item
but we didn't before upgrade from 4.7 to ECC 6.0 EHP 4
Is it upgrade problem within FM ?
Is there any way to just ignore that?
Thanks in advance
04-23-2013 11:28 AM
Hi,
If you have FSM-FM activated and PR is updating FM in your update profile, then commitment item is necessary. You can create derivation rules (FMDERIVE) to fill this automatically based on document's parameters.
Regards,
Eli
04-23-2013 11:28 AM
Hi,
If you have FSM-FM activated and PR is updating FM in your update profile, then commitment item is necessary. You can create derivation rules (FMDERIVE) to fill this automatically based on document's parameters.
Regards,
Eli
04-24-2013 9:56 AM
I eliminated PR(value type 50) in update profile but It didn't work
Is It a upgrade issue? that's why It's ECC 6.0?
Regards,
04-24-2013 11:12 AM
How did you eliminate PR? Did you manually intervene in FMUP01 table?
04-25-2013 1:49 AM
nope
there's IMG setting
under Actual and Commitment Update/Integration>general settings>Override update profile
and delete PR
am I doing something wrong?
Best Regards,
04-25-2013 8:05 AM
You can set it as 'statistical', but to delete via OF39 you wouldn't be able.
04-26-2013 1:57 AM
I set PR as statistical but It's not about this issue
that option only affect availability budget control
04-26-2013 9:01 AM
Of course, I know... My point is that you cannot simply delete 51 from the update profile (without modification in core table of FM). Just solve it with derivation rules as I suggested before.
04-29-2013 2:00 AM
04-25-2013 10:07 AM
yes, best to set derivation rules properly instead of deleting.
you can easily create a rule to set to dummy commitment item or whatever fits your business process flow..
04-26-2013 1:54 AM
Yeah, I already set dummy commitment item in my derivation rules
but I just want to know any other way to set optional not essential to put commitment item during PR
cause I did at 4.7 version without any other setting now I'm using ECC 6.0 and occured this problem