ChaRM and dependency checks between customizing request

[former_member196574]

Hello,

We just configured ChaRM on our system but we are already facing a big problem. ChaRM controls the transport and dependecies between workbench requests marvelously, but there is a problem with customizing requests which is SAP doesn't block the modifications in na customizing object that is already being changed.

For example, someone creates a country via SPRO and creates a customizing TR, he then proceeds to test this configuration in DEV but wait the end of the release window to transport the changes.

Another person goes on SPRO and change the currency of the configurated coutry, he tests it in DEV and wait for the end of the release window to transport the changes.

The problem/question: will the system control this dependency and apply the two requests in the correct order in QAS and PRD? How does the system know the correct order to apply the requests? Is there any way to prevent more than one person to change the same configuration objetct (like workbench)?

Thanks in advance for any help.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Fabio,

ChaRM uses IMPORT_ALL Feature for Normal change. By Import all, basically System does the Import of entire Queue. Not in the object or Task Level Import, complete Import of Transport requests in Queue Kind of package import,  Even Urgent changes which are imported before release also remains in Import buffer for final consolidation Import with all NC during Import_All.since all the changes from all colleagues goes together to Q and P, Managing the sequencing of transports order no longer a concern.

same context, you also Ends up with TR2 of sameobject overtakes TR1 or normal Change downgrades urgent Change. in this case, you Need to prevent the urgent Change developer to modify the same object lies in normal Change development. this use case addressedin Cross System lock. it is the centralised locking in solution Manager, so always the second developer get the warning or blocking when he touch the same objects.

DGP is the extenstion of CSOL, where you have proper approval Workflows and also warning and blocking during the imports.

if you have dual tracks, you should look for CSOL and DGP.

Hope this helps.

Thanks,

Jansi

[former_member196574]

Thanks everyone for the answers, very helpfull.

We will be conducting tests using the CSOL and DGP to try to prevent the situation I described earlier. I will update the topic if I get new information in case anyone else happens to have the same problem.

Thanks again,

Fabio Gross.

EDIT:

Using the helpful answers given above, we decided to activated the CSOL on the maintenance landscape and set it to display just warnings, this way whenever someone changes a configuration already being changed (that is not in production yet) a pop-up will be shown with the number of the other transport request and the responsible. We will be monitoring the system closely to see if a more restrictively solution should be applied.

[artemzhegalin]

Fabio Junior Gross wrote:

The problem/question: will the system control this dependency and apply the two requests in the correct order in QAS and PRD? How does the system know the correct order to apply the requests? Is there any way to prevent more than one person to change the same configuration objetct (like workbench)?

Thanks in advance for any help.

Hello, Fabio.

There are special tools in SAP Solution Manager for solving your problem:

• CSOL (Configuration wiki)
• Downgrade protection (Configuration wiki)

BR,

Artem

[rishav54]

Hi

the sequence will be governed by how you have released the transports from your development system in the same way it will be imported into production system or quality system.

However, You can implement the Downgrade protection (DGP) to further enhance this functionality, it will give you sequence warning as well in the changes.

thanks

Rishav