cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Two SLT configuration from client 010 & 020

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi All - I have two SLT configurations SRMDB and SUSDB. SRMDB is sourcing from client 010 SRM and SUSDB is sourcing from client 020. We are in DMIS 2011_1_700 SP 0009.

Problem: Table BUT000 is replicated in both configurations but there is only 1 trigger showing in the source system (I used SFSRFW_DROP_TRIGGER to view the source).

For example, I would replicate BUT000 in SUSDB first. The trigger source code shows the client 020 for MANDT. I would insert records into the table and replication would be OK. Then, I would replicate BUT000 in SRMDB. The trigger source code shows the client 010 for MANDT. At this point, it overwrote it. I would insert records in SUSDB BUT000 and nothing would show up in the source logging table therefore they would not go to HANA.

Does anyone have any tips?

Thanks in advance.

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (2)

Answers (2)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Is this the only table that this happens on? Or is this the only table that you are replicating from both clients?  I assume you've tried stopping and starting the table to see if it will recreate the trigger.

Another option is to set the configuration to be Multiple Client, so you pull across all of the clients into the target.  You could add an include program or rule to exclude certain Clients on various tables if you wanted 1 table to only load a certain client.  It's not as ideal as a filter being on the trigger.

I'm not certain if this setting would have to be checked when you created the configuration or not.  But if it worked, you'd only need 1 trigger per table.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi All - Please see 0001892481Conflicting generated objects using DMIS-based Applications.

I have not tested in dev because it requires to stop all replication which takes quite a bit of time to get back to normal with current development efforts.

Also planning to go to SPS11 for the INDX support. Will wait til then but the solution makes sense.