Skip to Content
0

IDOC posted success : status 53 but database not updated (table MARC): migration issue

Dec 14, 2016 at 10:05 AM

280

avatar image

Hi,

We are migrating material master from plant A to Plant B. I have created LSMW with BAPI method:

Business Object BUS1001006

Method SAVEDATA

Message Type MATMAS_BAPI

Basic Type MATMAS_BAPI03

I have idocs posted successfully with status 53, but table MARC is not getting updated, nor there are views created for the material in the target plant B.

This is happening to only a subset of materials from the load file.

There is no difference in terms of material type or any other factor that differentiates between the data that is created and data that is not created.

Please help.

Thanks,

Sudheer.

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

8 Answers

Jürgen L
Dec 14, 2016 at 10:32 AM
0

This is unfortunately insufficient to provide a solution.

SAP is not really randomly ignoring data from an upload, at least it has not yet happened to me.

Please post a screenshot from the IDoc segments and their fields

Also post the information from then application log, you get to it by double clicking the icon in front of the 53 status, alternative via SLG1 transaction

Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
Sudheer K Dec 14, 2016 at 11:46 AM
0

Hi Jurgen,

please find below details.

Please note: since the material was incompletely updated, we flagged it for deletion manually afterwards.

Thanks & Regards,

Sudheer.


idoc-error-1.jpg (48.8 kB)
idoc-error-2.jpg (24.9 kB)
idoc-error-1.jpg (48.8 kB)
idoc-error-3.jpg (71.7 kB)
idoc-error-4.jpg (43.3 kB)
Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
Jürgen L
Dec 14, 2016 at 12:01 PM
0

I asked about screenshots from each Idoc segment

Do really all your Idocs look similar from the structure and fields?

Are you creating new materials or do you extend existing materials or eventually a mix of both?

Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
Sudheer K Dec 14, 2016 at 12:13 PM
0

Hi Jurgen,

We are only extending materials to a new plant. No new material creation. All the IDOCs have same segments and same set of data.

Thanks ,

Sudheer.


idoc-error-5.jpg (24.4 kB)
idoc-error-6.jpg (22.6 kB)
idoc-error-7.jpg (22.9 kB)
Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
Jürgen L
Dec 14, 2016 at 12:51 PM
0

with extending you can actually hit countless different situations regarding existing data and its quality.

Looking at the screenshots from the Idoc I got the impression that the data in the IDoc itself is inconsistent.

You have marked all views in E1BPMATHEAD, but you have for example no data for a warehouse management view at all.

You also marked more fields with an X in the X-structure than you actually have data in the normal structure, eg. issue unit.

I can't say for sure if that is causing the trouble that you have, but it is certainly not a good starting basis.

I would check the change log of the material master. In one your screenshots I can see that you have a maintenance status BL which is accounting and storage location view. As your Idoc does not have any data (no MARD and MBEW segment) it might be that there was already data maintained for your target plant and your Idoc is confusing about updating and extending.

Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
Sudheer K Dec 14, 2016 at 01:57 PM
0

Hi Jurgen,

1. I selected all the views because i have data for some of the materials in my load file.

2. MBEW data was extended by a different LSMW program.

3. Note: when i load the file again for these materials which are not updated, the material is getting extended properly. But if the idoc is not giving error, i cannot know which materials to load again....

change log:

Thanks,

Sudheer.


idoc-error-8.jpg (29.0 kB)
Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
Jürgen L
Dec 14, 2016 at 09:49 PM
0

Had you tried if you get a log via SLG1 transaction?

You should for test purposes also enter a value for the field E1BPMATHEAD-INP_FLD_CHECK as this could force the creation of a log.

I still believe that it is caused by the incorrect use of the Xs

You should determine the X values dynamically based on the data in your source file.

If you load from Excel then you have usually only a low number of fields, you should investigate on which screens they are located and only set the X for a view if you have values for this view.

The same for the X for the field values, only put an X into the field if you have really data that needs to be entered or changed.

This way you have at least minimized unwanted influence.

Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
Sudheer K Dec 15, 2016 at 04:57 PM
0

Hi Jurgen,

Thanks for the inputs. However, I am not sure if i can agree that the X is the cause of the issue. Below my justification:

1. We cannot replicate the issue i.e.when i run the load file for the 2nd time, it updates the records properly.

2. We did not encounter this issue in other systems including quality and acceptance mock loads.

3. The database is being hit at the time idoc is posted, however it has only updated only certain view L. please see screenshot of material change log.

For every test/re-load we do (one record at a time), we are losing evidence of the situation. It has only happened once, and we do not know if it can re-occur and what impact it will have.

I am trying to get the log from SLG1, as i currently do not have the authorization. Will update you once i have the logs.

Thanks,

Sudheer.

Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded