Skip to Content
0

Significance of field WLK1-LFDNR

Mar 11, 2017 at 07:15 PM

91

avatar image

Dear All,

We are working on a report where field lfdnr of table wlk1 is used to fetch entries of articlesarticles which have lifdnr value as 1.

And we have noticed that for some articles, it is stored as 2 and for some,it is stored as 1.

But since the report is too old and I am new to IS-Retail, I am not able to find the significance of this field in fetching the results.

Could you please help me understand the same?

Regards,

Manasa

10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
* Please Login or Register to Answer, Follow or Comment.

2 Answers

Vibhor Kulshrestha Mar 13, 2017 at 09:20 AM
0

Hi Manasa

As per my understanding field WLK1-LFDNR shows number of listing condition for same assortment with same validity date. I think this field is made available due to the fact that an article can have multiple listing conditions for same validity and for this reason it will become difficult to make combination of Assortment, article and date as unique.

Asa differentiator LFDNR will act as counter to hold number of entries with same validity date.

Thanks

Vibhor

Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
Andras Strobl
Apr 11, 2017 at 07:29 AM
0

Hi Manasa,

The WLK1-LFDNR has purely technical reasons. As Vibhor has also pointed out, there might be multiple listing conditions, where the KEY fields of the WLK1 table are identical (but e.g. the module (URSAC) - through which the listing was performed - is different). So they are actually NOT the same listing conditions, but the KEY fields of the WLK1 table would be still identical. Certainly the key fields can never be identical, they always must be unique! Therefore the LFDNR has been added to the key fields of WLK1 table, enabling you to store "multiple" listing conditions.

So basically, this field has just technical purpose, nothing else.

Best regards,
Andras

Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded