cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

An error occured while creating the original attribute for

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi All,

We encounter this error in "An error occured while creating the original attribute for " DMS very often when a user edits a file & tries to check in.

I searched the forums & realized that this is caused by the inconsistencies in the KPRO & DMS server and removing these

inconsistencies will repair this issue.

I have been deleting the inconsistencies using DMS reports DMS_KPRO_READ & DMS_KPRO_CHECK1 and it resolves the error

so the file is unlocked. But I haven't been able to figure out the ROOT cause of this issue.I couldn't find any information on the root cause of this issue. What can be done to fix this error permanently.

Regards

-Neha

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (3)

Answers (3)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Neha,

How do we check the inconsistencies using these reports DMS_KPRO_CHECK1 & DMS_KPRO_READ ?  And how do I correct it?

Thank you

Sudhakar

christoph_hopf
Advisor
Advisor
0 Kudos

Hi Sudhakar,

normally if you face such an issue you can use report DMS_KPRO_READ for the affected document info record to get the relevant LOIO- and PHIO-ID.

In a second step you can execute report DMS_KPRO_CHECK1 to scan your content server or content repository for existing inconsistencies. Due to the set radio button the LOIO- or PHIO-ID entries are displayed in the result list.

As soon as you got a result you can search with the ID noted down from the DMS_KPRO_READ result and check if this specific ID is in the list. For further information please see also the SAP note 906266.

Best regards,

Christoph

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Neha,

Please go to transaction SE16 and enter 'SDOKPROP' as table. Then enter 'DMS*' in the field PROP_NAME and press F8. Now all DMS related entries should be displayed to you. Please compare them with the following entries displayed in the attached screenshot and maintain the missing entries.

DMS_ACTIVE_VERSION 00 Active Version

DMS_APPLICATION 00 Logical application

DMS_CHECKOUT_USER 00 Checkout User

DMS_CREATE_AUDIT 00 Generate new version of the original

DMS_DEFAULT_LANGUAGE 00 Default Language

DMS_DELETEABLE 00 PHIO deletable

DMS_DOC_KEY 02 IWB_DMS01 DMS_DOCKEY Document info record

DMS_DOC_VERSION 00 Version of relevant document

DMS_DRAW_APPNR 00 Application number from DRAW

DMS_DRAW_DTTRG 00 Data carrier from DRAW

DMS_DRAW_FILEP 00 File name from DRAW

DMS_FILE1 00 File name(firstpart)

DMS_FILE2 00 File name(secondpart)

DMS_FILE3 00 File name(thirdpart)

DMS_FILE_ID 00 GUID that points to table DMS_PHIO2FILE

DMS_FRMTXT 00 Format description, ID of additional file

DMS_MUP_CAT 00 Markup category

DMS_MUP_FLAG 00 Markup flag

DMS_ORDER 00 Sequence of additional files

DMS_STATUS 00 Document status

DMS_STATUSNR 00 Number in status protocol

DMS_STATUSNR_X 00 References to Status Log

Please pay attention that all entries are typed well and that there are no spelling errors. If all these values are maintained correctly in table SDOKPROP the dump and the error message should no longer appear.

For further information you can also see the corresponding SDN WIKI page under

https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/wiki?path=/display/plm/error26296in+CV01N

Regards,

Ravindra

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Ravindra,

I checked the entries as you suggested and they are looking good.

Regards

-Neha

christoph_hopf
Advisor
Advisor
0 Kudos

Dear Neha,

if all the entries in table SOKPROP are maintained correctly then the reason for error 26296 is caused by inconsistencies between KPRO and DMS tables as mentioned before and could be solved by report DMS_KPRO_CHECK1.

Best regards,

Christoph

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Chris,

Thanks for your reply.

The error is indeed caused by these inconsistencies in KPRO & DMS & I have been using the same report DMS_KPRO_CHECK1

to delete the inconsistencies as & when they arise.

But I was trying to figure out if there is any way to avoid this because it is occurring very frequently in our environment.

I am really not sure if I can get rid of this error.I have tried checking the content server connection in CSADMIN & it seems okay.

SO now I am thinking to delete the RFC destinations SAPHTTP & SAPHTTPA & recreate them afresh.Not sure if it resolves the issue.

Regards

-Neha

christoph_hopf
Advisor
Advisor
0 Kudos

Hi Neha,

from my point of view updating the version of SAPHTTP and SAPHTTA my help to avoid issues with DMS originals because these connections are used to transfer data from the content server.

Best regards,

Christoph

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Chris,

Thanks . I will check the version of these & see if updating to latest version resolved my issue.

Will update the thread soon.

Regards

-Neha

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Chris,

How do I get to know the version of my SAPHTTP & SAPHTTPA ?

We are on UNIX.

Regards

-Neha

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Neha,

I am facing the same problem.

Was this resolved after updating to latest version.

Thanks and Regards,

Rahul

Former Member
0 Kudos

Rahul,

Christoph's response helped me to fix this issue. You need to run the report DMS_KPRO_CHECK1 and identify the DIR number in the result. Delete the entry. 

I also observe another cause for this issue.

We use a net work directory to check out documents and checkin from there. Some times users get this error when they don't have the access to that net work directory.

thank you

SUD

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Sudhakar,

Sorry for this very very late reply.

As suggested, I have been removing the consistencies from the document. But, the users are asking for the root cause of this issue.

I tried to recreate this in DEV and QAS environments also, but it never happened there.

Hi Neha,

Did updating the versions of SAPHTTP and SAPHTTA help you?

If any body has any other ideas on finding the root cause, please let me know.

Thank You.

christoph_hopf
Advisor
Advisor
0 Kudos

Hi Neha,

based on my experience this kind of inconsistency may occur if there is a connection problem to the content server for example. Unfortunately I never was able to reproduce such a scenario and create a new inconsistency.

Please see also the SAP notes 1403231 and 942227 which might be useful to avoid such inconsistencies in the future.

Best regards,

Christoph