Queues stuck in CIF requiring manual attention

[Former Member]

Hi Experts,

I have PPDS integrated to ECC through VC and the planning is on characteristics.

During Production order conversion for a planned order, the queue generated from the request is getting stuck in the Inbound list with the error: "Screen output without connection to user." .

Each time someones needs to debug the stuck queue which generates a dialog box saying CONFLICT in values. The dialog box shows Old Value and New value fields which when the user accepts or rejects, clears the queue.

Can please anyone tell me the reason for such a error and is there any standard setting to override such pop-ups during CIF transactions in background.

This is resulting in high number of stuck queues which require a lot of manual effort to resolve.

Regards,

Avinas.

[wilian_segatto · Accepted solution]

Hi Avinas!

I just spoke with the SAP Development Team on this issue.

Here is the SAP response:

"If a planned/production order is being integrated from APO to ERP, configuration is executed in ERP. What happens is the following.

As you know, not all characteristics that are available in ERP need to be integrated with APO. Now, if a Planned or Production Order is created in APO and published to ERP, during this process Characteristic values of Configuration in APO are sent along with this order.

During order creation in ERP, the Configuration process is triggered in ERP. So at this time, all object dependencies (Procedures, Constraints, etc.) are being processed/evaluated.

However, these procedures may not change values that are passed from APO. What happens in the case described in the thread is that ERP Configuration calculates a different value for a Characteristic than the one passed from APO. So there is a mismatch of values.

So the issue described is not a bug/error. The customer needs to setup his object dependencies accordingly, considering that ERP may not change values sent from APO."

So Avinas, kindly review your object dependencies and adjust your settings so the values from APO are not redetermined by ECC.

Best regards,

Wilian Segatto

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Thanks for the lead Willian and Andy.

I will have a re-look on the object dependencies and try to pin point the error, but i would be grateful if you can point me in a more specific direction.

Regards,

Avinas.

[sourabh_jain66]

Hi Avinas,,

Absolutely if there is an issue first thing to check is, if the issue is a known one and if yes then if there is a solution available for same.

places for that are SCN and service market place.

If you are not able to find any solution for the issue from these places then you should go and raise OSS message to SAP for same.

Rgds

Sourabh

[andy_yeri]

Hi Avinas,

Lemme take a guess. On the ECC config menu PRODUCTION >> SFC >> MASTER DATA >> ORDER >> DEFINE ADDITIONAL SETTINGS FOR PRODUCTION ORDERS, you've flagged ON the check box to "Use Reference Characteristics" under the FAST DATA ENTRY section.

The characteristic that you've shown on ur screen print, is ofcourse, being passed with its value b/w ECC & APO. Assuming my "guess" above is correct, here is what's happening, because of which you've the CIF Queue block issue -

The value for your characteristic is getting passed from ECC to APO & when the Production Order is being created in ECC, the system, given the configuration setting mentioned above, is trying to re-determine a NEW value for the same characteristic. What that results in is a conflict with the OLD one (set in ECC for the document).

Good News: This is a standard SAP BUG (we used ECC 6.0 & SCM 7.0) & you should raise an OSS message. I believe there is an OSS note that they've created for this. Released for general usage or not, not sure.

Good Luck

[wilian_segatto]

Hi Andy!

If the issue is a bug, the first action is NOT to raise a message to SAP.

The first step should be to search for a solution, specially if a correction note has already been created.

As a Community Member, please encourage the correct behavior on such cases.

Best regards,

Will