System Impact

[Former Member]

Hi All,

In my project,For various business reasons, we are looking to sett up the stores as plants u2013 meaning that we would follow the STO flow.

There are some 500 stores. This would mean that we would either configure 500 plants OR 1 plant with some 500 storage locations.

The STO process has some undeniable drawbacks: e.g. standard transit stock reports are only on plant level u2013 no distinction on storage location level.

I would ask your assistance in clarifying the following questions:

What is the system impact of configuring some 500 plants?

What is the system impact of STO between storage locations for 1 plant with some 500 storage locations?

Regards,

Kalpana.

[Former Member]

Got useful inputs for my problem.

[JL23]

I would not look at hardware aspects. ( I have about 500 plants in my system).

transactions and transactional data is causing more issues than 500 entries a few tables.

(I dont know why a plant shall update 16000 tables - this is just nonsense. And even there would be that many tables, it would jsut be 500 entries instead of 1, which is nothing compared to entries in table MSEG after a year live)

We had meetings for several hours and days with members from finance, controlling, logistics, and other teams to evaluate to pros and cons.

There maybe tax issues that you may not be able to solve easily if you decide it wrong. and this decision certainly cannot be taken here with the few information you gave.

[former_member182609]

Hi Jurgen,

May be you are correct.The information Plant updates in tables come to one of technical person . If any mistakes in my comments please excuse me.

[Former Member]

Hi Jurgen,

It is just a clarification required on the System impact . which would be a better choice in terms of Technical context:

EitherGo for configuring some 500 plants or STO between storage locations for 1 plant with some 500 storage locations?

This nformation would just be a clarification but not the final decision. I just need some inputs on my query.

Please help me.

Regards,

Kalpana.

[Former Member]

Can I have some inputs please..

Regards,

Kalpana.

[JL23]

Of course the plant is a much bigger customizing object than a storage location.

With a storage location you are almost done when you created it.

Contrary a plant requires dependend customizing, you have to setup MRP planners per plant, you may have to assign the purchasing organisation at plant level, in SD is the shipping point determination based on plants.and many many more.

From a technical point of view, you will have some more data with a plant.

if one material is shared by all 500 plants. then you would have 500 records in table MARC, which is a much bigger table than table MARD which holds the storage location info for a material.

But again, the master data or customizing is not worth to talk about regarding technical aspects. Transactional data has much more impact.

I am doing archiving projects. my MARC table has 340000 records. and this is just rank 455 in our hitlist of the biggest tables with a percentage of 0.02 % of our total table size.

[Former Member]

Hi All,

Thank you fro all your inputs.

Regards,

Kalpana.

[former_member182609]

If the valuation does not impacts you can create stores as storage locations.If material valuation price is changes then you have to go for plants.

If there is no impact on the price better you can create as storage location.If you create 500 plants sytem occupies more space.

If you want to tranfer materials in ECC5 nad ECC6 you can use sto process storage location to storage location.

[Former Member]

Similar to Shridhar, I also would suggest to define 500 storage locations if price remains same across all storage locations.

[Former Member]

Hi Sridhar,

Can you please elobarate me on this statement.

If you want to tranfer materials in ECC5 nad ECC6 you can use sto process storage location to storage location.

Regards,

Kalpana

[former_member182609]

Just like Stock Transport order between plants,You can use If you are using ECC 5 or ECC 6 version you can use stock transport order between storage locations with in a plant.

[Former Member]

Hi Sridhar,

Thank you very much for your answers. I am a technical consultant and so would like to know what would the technical impact .. we have same material price valuation, so can you confirm me whether confirguring 500 storage locations for each plant is better than configuring 500 plants in terms of System/server performance , technical maintenance and system/server space.

Your help in this regards would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Kalpana.

Edited by: Kalpana Timmapuram on Sep 30, 2009 4:18 PM

[former_member182609]

If you create one plant it will update nearly 16000 tables in SAP.So If you create 500 plants it occupies more space.I would suggest if there is no impact of material price you can create store as a storage location.