Buffer Table Not Up To Date Short Dump When Publishing Change Version of Bid Invitation

[Former Member]

Hi experts,

We are running SRM 5.5 with Support Level 16.

We have a bid invitation for which a user is trying to publish a Change Version. This bid contains two bid outlines, with one line item in each bid outline:

ITEM 1: HIER (Bid Outline)

ITEM 2: Line Item

ITEM 3: HIER (Bid Outline)
ITEM 4: Line Item

However, upon clicking on the Check or Publish button, the system throws a CX_BBP_PD_ABORT exception short dump. The reason for the exception given in ST22 is "Buffer table not up to date".

Due to organisational system security restrictions, I am unable to copy-paste the dump from ST22, so I will be typing out some of the details here.

------

Transaction: BBP_BID_INV

Program: SAPLBBP_PDH

Screen: SAPLBBP_BID_INV_1000

Termination occurred in the ABAP program "SAPLBBP_PDH" - in "BBP_PD_ABORT". The main program was "SAPLBBP_BID_INV".

In the source code you have the termination point in line 73.

Active Calls/Events

(formatted below as "No: Type: Name")

24: Function: BBP_PD_ABORT

23: Form: ABORT

22: Form: ITMADM_UPDATE

21: Form: ITMADM_MAINTAIN_SINGLE

20: Form: ITEM_F_CHECK_FROM_WTAB

19: Form: ITEMLIST_F_CHECK

18: Function: BBP_ITEMLIST_CHECK

17: Form: PROCDOC_DB_CHECK

16: Form: PROCDOC_CHECK

15: Function: BBP_PROCDOC_CHECK

14: Form: SSIS_DOCUMENT_CHECK_COMPLETE

13: Form: STATUS_SET_AND_INTERNAL_SAVE

12: Form: PROCDOC_UPDATE

11: Function: BBP_PROCDOC_UPDATE

10: Form: CHANGE_VERSION_UPDATES_ACTIVE

9: Function: BBP_PDCV_UPDATE_ACTIVE

8: Form: PROCDOC_CHECK

7: Function: BBP_PROCDOC_CHECK

6: Function: BBP_PD_BID_CHECK

5: Form: FCODE_DOCUMENT_CHECK

4: Form: FCODE

3: Function: BBP_BID_PROCESS

2: Form: PROCESS

1: Module (PAI): PROCESS

-----

The ABORT subroutine is being called in Step 22 (ITMADM_UPDATE), at the following line:

* parent guids have to be identical ...

if gt_itmadm-parent <> w_itmadm-parent.

  perform abort.

endif.

Upon tracing the variable values in the ST22 dump, it appears the program terminates when processing line 3 (i.e. the second Bid Outline). It appears that the first Bid Outline processes fine.

In the iteration for Line 3, the dump provides that gt_itmadm-parent contains the GUID to the Change Version document header, whereas w_itmadm-parent contains the GUID to the original Bid Invitation document header, resulting in a mismatch and subsequently program termination.

We have tried to replicate this bid invitation in our Development environment, but when executing, both gt_itmadm-parent and w_itmadm-parent contain GUIDs to the Change Version document header, hence the program does not abort.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

Best regards,

Kwong How

[Vidya1]

Hello,

I think this note will fix your issues -

1416959 -  Invalid GUIDs in BBP_ITEM_CHECK_BADI

Regards,

Vidya

[Former Member]

Hi Vidya,

Unfortunately, this note has already been included in Support Level 16, which is the level our system is running on. Therefore we already have the fix in the system.

However, many thanks for the suggestion!

Best regards,

Kwong How

[Vidya1]

Hi Kwong How,

Okay I see. There are 2 more notes related to the PD update - 1877600 , 1561750. Though the symptom mentions PO, they are applicable to BID as well. If this too does not help, suggest raising a message.

Regards,

Vidya

[Former Member]

Hi Janu,

For Note 1561750, I have looked at the Correction Details and observed that it makes changes to an IF-ELSE block, but will result in the same path of code execution as before. I.e., the Note changes the code from "IF a THEN b, ELSE c" to just "c", but according to my code trace, we are already executing the "ELSE c" block in its current state.

We will look further into Note 1877600. The unfortunate situation here is that since we are unable to replicate this issue in our Development/QA environment, and the Note description does not explicitly fit the situation we are facing, we need to be very sure that the Note can address the issue before bringing it into Production.

Otherwise, we will raise a message as suggested.

Thank you so much for your help!

Best regards,

Kwong How