Internal number assignment for object QMERKRUECK (numbers are in critical area)

[former_member221124]

Hi

I am currently going through the following message while assigning Inspection plan to inspection lot.

Internal number assignment for object QMERKRUECK (numbers are in critical area). Screen shot attached.

I checked in SNRO for the above object and found current NR status is 90132500 . Screen shots attached.

Now Please clarify me on the below points.

1-QMERKRUECK is Confirmation number of an inspection characteristic.That means more is the number of Insp characteristic in an insp lot, more will be the confirmation number , Am i right ?

2-What problem i am going to face when the number reaches the maximum value ie 99999999 ?  I guess the situation may be such worse that all inspection lots generates would be of CRTD status. Please correct me if i am wrong.

3- If its really critical then how to avoid this . If i would like to create new number range for the above object then how to do that as system does not allow alfa numeric number range .

I have already gone through the following links but still not getting the solution or not sure about the impact if i will follow the instructions as suggested by different experts.

Regards

D Mohanty

[Former Member]

D Mohanty, DD QM good afternoon,

Were you able to solve the problem? I have the same problem and was wondering what points should be considered?

Thank you very much

Ana

Message was edited by: Craig S

[former_member221124]

Hi Ana

Ya the problem was not solved but at the same time i am not facing any issues either. So just go

through the related links in SCN and you will get to know the required settings in number range

assignments.

Regards

DD

[former_member221025]

Hello Mohanty,

I think you need to archive old inspection lots, inspection results; and reset Number range.

We already have an OSS note for this message:

1645936  - Message RU153 "Internal number assignment for object QMERKRUECK  (numbers are in critical...

Amol.

[former_member221124]

Hi

Sorry to reply you so late as last week i was out of office .

By the way Amol i have already gone through the SAP note and also raised the issue with SAP. They also suggested me to go through the same note.

Actually archiving is really tough in live server as client has to finish so many pending jobs before going into archiving. Anyway if its the only way out then certainly we will go for that.

Regards

D Mohanty

[busyaban7]

Hi Mohanty,

Well, I am not sure if we can predict the best approach here.

I think 99 million confirmation for MIC is a huge range provided by SAP and this is not to be consumed so easily, like your case you still have enough number range free and this is not going to impact you now.

Providing additional slots for number range (more than 8 digits) means SAP will have to open up many dependent settings (not sure what are they...) and that may/might not be a possibility in future, as this may result in data overflow to my understanding.

Looks like complete archiving is the best approach if you still keep on using the same client. Else, if you make system copy with open inspection confirmation records, and do not migrate complete historic records in the new system, this will result into partial archiving of insp lots. Sometimes due to compliance issues business may wish to retain 5 - 7 years of inspection lot as historic records in the new system, but that may not potentially eat up the number range.

These are just my thoughts!!

Thanks,

Arijit

[former_member42743]

Just a thought.. I'm guessing, (A total Wild A$$ guess here), that SAP uses some type of standard,, say 10% of remaining numbers, as the trigger to issue the warning.

it seems that the "answer" has been to just let the number roll over.  If you want to get rid of the warning, just resetting the number now to 00000001 would probably get rid of that warning message.  Ideally you do some research and if possible do the necessary archiving first.

Just a thought though.

Craig

[former_member42743]

I hope you'll be able to respond on this discussion and share your findings when you decide and test a solution.

Because I'm always moving on to new projects, I've never encountered this issue and I don't think a lot of people have.  It would be great to have this discussion closed with a solution on it.

Thanks!

Craig

[nitin_jinagal]

Hi,

Now Please clarify me on the below points.

1-QMERKRUECK is Confirmation number of an inspection characteristic.That means more is the number of Insp characteristic in an insp lot, more will be the confirmation number , Am i right ? 

I guess, yes.

2-What problem i am going to face when the number reaches the maximum value ie 99999999 ?  I guess the situation may be such worse that all inspection lots generates would be of CRTD status. Please correct me if i am wrong.

3- If its really critical then how to avoid this . If i would like to create new number range for the above object then how to do that as system does not allow alfa numeric number range .

I don't think you would face any problem. Once the range is reached, it will automatically start from the beginning (provided 'No Rolling' isn't set). You wouldn't get inspection lots in CRTD but they'll come with REL only.

Considering the maximum limit (99999999), I don't see a way to create new range as you have already taken all. You can proceed this way.

This would, however in QAMV, reflect two inspection lots with the same confirmation number.

Though I never faced a scenario where this range was reached. But Testing this in my Sandbox with reducing the Number range and everything worked fine. I think, there might be issue if the confirmation number is mapped in some Z report but this probability is also very rare.

I don't see any other impact. You might want to get more suggestion from the QM experts.

ntn