on 12-18-2008 7:10 AM
Dear Experts,
We have a Z report for Stock on posting date(similar to MB5B with some addons as per client reqmt) and we have used MARDH table for opening stock for any period in that report. But we face problems now as this table is not getting updated properly. Is there anyway to update the MARDH table for every period for material and storage location combination? Else can we use any other table for Stock on posting date report?
Regards,
Ravi Kumar
As of Release 4.5, stock and valuation fields that refer to the previous
period or those dating back even farther, are not stored in those tables
in which the current stock data is stored (MBEW, MARD, MCHB, and so on)
but in so-called history tables (MBEWH, MARDH, MCHBH, and so on.).
(Also compare release note for period closing as of Release 4.5)
These history tables can have one entry per period. The values of such
an entry refer to the end of the period. For the current period, there
are no entries in the history tables. An entry is not written in this
history table for every period. If stock-relevant or valuation-relevant
data change, the system might generate an entry in the history table.
Furthermore, the fields LFMON ('Current Period (Booking period)') and
LFGJA ('Fiscal Year of the Current Period') in the stock tables are no
longer automatically set to the current period by the period closing
program. The period is only transferred to the new period during the
first movement. At the same time, the relevant history entries are also
generated.
You can refer to SAP note 193554 for more information.
What is the addons that required by your client ?
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
See, you have your problems in a Z-program. Why would you then change the behavior of another standard program to make your Z-program work? Why dont you just change the Z-Program to either look in MARDH or in MARD to pick values according to SAPs standard design, that is clearly explained in this note?
SAP changed the old behavior to avoid numerous meaningless and redundand records in history tables. (once your system is live for 10 and more years and your perfomance slows down because of too many large tables, then you will that this approach makes sense)
User | Count |
---|---|
96 | |
10 | |
9 | |
5 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.