cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

MAIN_POSTPROC/UEXP_SPDD - APPEND_SAPCOMP

wagener-mark
Contributor
0 Kudos

Hello,
we just made SPAU in our development system.
After restarting the SUM process, when we finished transaction SPAU, we ran into an error:


Severe error(s) occurred in phase MAIN_POSTPROC/UEXP_SPDD!
Last error code set: Issues occurred calling 'APPEND_SAPCOMPONENT' -
check phase log for details.
A trouble ticket and an archive with all relevant log files have been generated.
Trouble ticket: "/SUM_Paket/SUM/abap/log/SAPup_troubleticket.log"
Log archive: "/SUM_Paket/SUM/abap/log/SAPup_troubleticket_logs.sar"


First we tried to repeat the step. The same error occurred again. The checks.log showed the following statement:

# XXXXXX:/SUM_Paket/SUM/abap/log #
%BEGIN MAIN_POSTPROC/UEXP_SPDD TEXT
Warning: APPEND_SAPCOMPONENT returned message: "Appending attributes
failed.XXXK911422".

With the SUM tool the system got certain components, component releases and Support Package levels. This information is in an internal table. The
components, component releases and Support Package levels, which the system has now are different. When the SPDD and/or SPAU transport was exported, the SUM tool noticed, that the information differs. This could be e.g. if further updates were done via SAINT or SPAM after the SUM was (almost) finished and before the export for the SPDD/SPAU request was done. If this SPDD/SPAU request shall be included in a further SUM procedure, it is
important that the components, component releases and Support Package levels of the SPDD/SPAU request fit to the target status of that SUM procedure.

We also checked note:

1735879 - Error occurs in phase MAIN_POSTP/UEXP_SPAU or  MAIN_POSTP/UEXP_SPDD

Both causes (A and B) do not fit our situation, because
A - The source.client is 000
B - The file umodauto.lst (XXXXXX:/SUM_Paket/SUM/abap/bin) contains the requests, and not the tasks and the correct release:


SPAU 740 XXXK911424
SPDD 740 XXXK911422



Before implementing the update on our developement system we
tested the update on a sandbox copy of the dev system. There we did not face

this issue. Only difference I see is, that the transports did not have a targetsystem in
the sandbox system.


Kind regards,

Mark Wagener

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

james_wong
Employee
Employee
0 Kudos

Hello Mark and Arun,

You can refer to KBA 1735879 - "Error occurs in phase MAIN_POSTP/UEXP_SPAU or MAIN_POSTP/UEXP_SPDD" to resolve the issue.

Best regards,

James

== == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == ==

Check out accelerate finding upgrade solutions:

http://wiki.scn.sap.com/wiki/x/6g3FGQ

Your feedback is very valuable to us. Please take a few moments to complete a simple survey.

https://surveys.sap.com/jfe/form/SV_cMC0gNY5DvPpZzv

== == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == ==

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi James,

SAP note 1735879 is not applicable in our case , since the transport request was created in client 000 and i changed the file umodauto.lst to reflect the transport request number and not the task . I was still facing the issue with the phase MAIN_POSTP/UEXP_SPDD.

*performing the EHP7 upgrade on sandbox system , so took this option.

                                                                                    

I had to perform a workaround to pass this phase . The phase only takes a backup of the SPDD transport and copies to another request . I took a manual backup of the SPDD  transport and removed the request from the file umodauto.lst . re-ran the phase and upgrade moved forward.

Note: Raised a message with SAP ,they gave the same SAP note numbers which are discussed in this thread.

Thanks

Arun

Answers (2)

Answers (2)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Mark,

Did you find any solution for the issue. I am currently facing the same issue and would like to know if there was any solution provided by SAP.

Thanks

Arun

mirra_yin
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hello Mark

I find that you've already created incident to SAP regarding this issue, so could you close the discussion here?

BR.

Mirra