Question:
Dear Gurus,
I have a scenario that i choose the wrong structure indicator for my func loc, how i i change the structure indicator after it being created.
Example.
I have 2 structure indicator
1. XXXX-XXX-XX-X
2. XXXX-XXX-XX-XX
I Created Func loc name AB01 with structure indicator 1, then i realised i wanted the indicator 2.
I Try to deleted the AB01, by deletion flag, but it didn't work. The history still in there, i couldn't make a new AB01 even with a new structure indicator
Any help woulg be greatly appreciated.
Ciao,
Chik3nRic3
_________________
PM Forum : PJA, Didier, Cyg , What your opinion?
General Forum : zz, What your opinion?
Any other question need help : Private Message Snowy , and mark it "URGENT" or it wont be reply by him
Answer:
hello,
first, start activating alternative labelling.
Didier
Answer:
With alternate labeling, If AB01 is a mistake than i make it into YZ01,
Still i can't use the AB01, because it in history, and still both of them under the same structure indicator even though in the history showing:
AB01 Structure indicator 1
YZ01 Structure indicator 2,
But if you see under TAB structure for YZ01 , it will show Structure indicator 1.
Ciao,
Chik3nRic3
_________________
PM Forum : PJA, Didier, Cyg , What your opinion?
General Forum : zz, What your opinion?
Any other question need help : Private Message Snowy , and mark it "URGENT" or it wont be reply by him
Answer:
Hi
The safer option would be to archive the functional location (As mentioned you have just marked it for deletion. You need to archive it so that it is deleted from the database/system)
After this you will be able to recreate the same
Activate Alternate Labelling only if you are confident about the functionality. Once activated you cannot Undo it.
Answer:
I agree....... Activating Alt Labeling is a overkill for the stated issue.
_________________
Regards,
Ashish
Answer:
Guys,
Just a point to note:
Even in the SAP training notes SAP do not recommend using Alternate Labeling ???
_________________
Sponsored partner: www.arch.co.uk
PM/CS FAQ
Search SAPFans
Answer:
hello Pete,
do you remember in which course this is mentioned ?
Didier.
Answer:
Didier,
PLM305 (Structuring & Managing Technical Objects) notes refer to the dangers
The instructor guide reinforces this
_________________
Sponsored partner: www.arch.co.uk
PM/CS FAQ
Search SAPFans
Answer:
PJA,
Can you highlight these somewhere for the forum please. May be a as a new posting. Will be a good reference for all.
Thanks,
_________________
Regards,
Ashish
Answer:
hello PJA, Bhartiaa,
in the mean time I found some info of the instructer guide :
- only to be activated when really needed
- to be tested extensively
- no complete 'way back' to the original configuration if you change your mind.
- the programming context : new table IFLOS => so start changing all your own ABAP's !
- the existance or program RI_IFLOS2IFLOT to optimise performance
I must admit that in the past (4.5 and early 4.6) there were a lot of issues with alternative labelling. You can find the recording of this in the numerous SAP Notes about this subject. But in my last implementations, I activated this without problems for covering the following functionality :
- a 'rename' functionality for functional locations
- the length of the label is extended from 30 to 40 characters
the third (and basic!) functionality of having 2 labelling systems for the same functional location is very academic, certainly when you read the following sentence in note 213332 :
"Multiple structuring of the same locations is not possible with Alternative Labeling!"
regards. Didier
Answer:
Thanx Gurus for the Answer
Ciao,
Chik3nRic3
_________________
PM Forum : PJA, Didier, Cyg , What your opinion?
General Forum : zz, What your opinion?
Any other question need help : Private Message Snowy , and mark it "URGENT" or it wont be reply by him
Answer:
Dear PM'ers,
I haven't had a lot of experience with alternative labeling (once in 4.5b).
My current client is on 4.6c SP47 and is keen on using the following functionality provided by alternative labeling:
a) being able to use the 40 character functional location label
b) being able to reuse functional location labels, and
c) being able to rename functional location labels
They are not interested in using multiple labeling systems (ie having one object identified by 2 labels simultaneously).
(b) and (c) are particularly attractive to them as they 'frequently' decommission a section of plant (Production Unit A), and rebuild it, retaining its original identity. Generally the newly commissioned structure is different from the previous structure.
Consequently, the functional location structure for Production Unit A could look very different at some time in the future.
I've turned on alternative labeling in a development client, run ZZ_RI_IFLOT2IFLOS, created some notifications and orders, chopped and changed some labels, created some more notifications and orders and then checked out the following:
o functional location and equipment master records
o the notifications and orders
o lots of standard SAP transactions (as per OSS note 365184)
o PMIS
o classification selection of functional locations
o our custom reports, exits, developments etc
After this preliminary investigation, the only problem I've discovered is with one of our developments.
Given that ZZ_RI_IFLOT2IFLOS is supposed to address the performance issues commonly associated with alternative labeling, do you think I've missed something ??
For my client's requirements, why would I NOT turn alternative labeling on ???
apc