LSA++ Design Question

[debanshu_mukherjee_1983]

I am working on a project wherein we had a flow directly from Datasource to Cube in LSA system (BW on Oracle). Now, I want to design new flow in LSA++ system (BW 7.4 SP11 on HANA 1.0 SP12) and I am thinking that I design it like this: Datasource -> Standard DSO (Data Acquisition Layer) and that's it...coz I don't want to unnecessary waste memory by duplicating data in multiple layers (Acquisition, Propagation, Data mart). But as per LSA++ is this acceptable to keep only acquisition layer and keep a DSO there and build reporting on top of that? I can also keep an additional DSO (Corporate Memory with compression) for the corporate memory layer... Is this compliant with LSA++ philosophy?

[debanshu_mukherjee_1983]

Thanks for the answer.
Also spoke to some of the other BW experts and got the same confirmation that we can use the datasource/psa as acquisiton layer and keep the DSO in the propagation layer and then put a multiprovider/composite provider on top.

Thanks for the inputs again.

Regards
Debanshu

[FCI]

In LSA++, the virtualization layer is the only mandatory one. All the others are optional.

Here is a data model from the business content (SD delivery):

Only 2 physical layers + virtualization layer.

[FCI]

The virtualization layer is mandatory in LSA++. You need a composite provider or a multi-Provider on top of your DSO.

Regards,

Frederic

[debanshu_mukherjee_1983]

Thanks Frédéric for the prompt response.
Yes, I'll put a Multiprovider or Composite provider on top of my DSO. I am fine with that.
But my primary concern was " Is it mandatory/recommended to have at least 2 layers (viz acquistion & propagation) or is it ok if I just keep the acquisition layer and a corporate memeory.

So, my overall design would be:

Acquistion Layer: Stnd DSO
Corporate mem:ADSO (with compression)-This can be used for full repair loads/rebuild of the acquisition layer DSO in case of issues.
Virtualization: Multiprovider

So, essentially what I'm asking is that whether it's ok to skip the propagation and reporting layer altogether?
Would this pose any issues or do you see any concerns with this approach?

Regards
Debanshu