topic Re: inner join and for all entries in Application Development and Automation Discussions

inner join and for all entries

Former Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:08:54 GMT

hi experts

can we use both inner join and for all entries in the same select statement.

regards,

siri.

Re: inner join and for all entries

Former Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:11:48 GMT

we cant take inner join and for all entries in the same select statement....

regard,

vishal

Re: inner join and for all entries

Laxmana_Appana_ — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:14:53 GMT

Hi,

Yes , we can use both in one select.

Ex:

SELECT a~fld1
         b~fld2
         INTO CORRESPONDING FIELDS OF TABLE i_tab
         FROM Ztab1 AS a INNER JOIN Ztab2 AS b
         ON    a~fld3 = b~fld3
         FOR ALL ENTRIES IN i_tab2
         WHERE a~fld1 = i_tab2-fld1

check the performance of the program in SE30 , if it is taking much time , then select data into different internal tables , then use Read statements to get correct data into final internal table.

Regards

Appana

*Reward Points for helpful answers

Re: inner join and for all entries

Former Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:22:26 GMT

yes we can use both

if not it_matnr[] is initial.

 select a~matnr b~maktx into table it_itab from
        mara as a inner join 
        makt as b on
        a~matnr = b~matnr 
        for all entries in it_matnr
        where a~matnr = it_matnr-matnr.

endif.

Re: inner join and for all entries

Former Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:22:28 GMT

but there is performance difference between these two no.

thats why i had a doubt.

Re: inner join and for all entries

ldzierza — Fri, 01 Mar 2024 11:34:22 GMT

SELECT STPO~STLTY STPO~STLNR STPO~STLKN STPO~STPOZ STPO~IDNRK STPO~MEINS FROM MARA AS MARA INNER JOIN MAST AS MAST ON MARA~MATNR = MAST~MATNR INNER JOIN STPO AS STPO ON MAST~STLNR = STPO~STLNR INTO TABLE GT_ZINT_CARR_STPO FOR ALL ENTRIES IN GT_ZINT_CARR_MARA WHERE MARA~MATNR = GT_ZINT_CARR_MARA-MATNR.

Re: inner join and for all entries

MarcoK — Fri, 01 Mar 2024 12:11:55 GMT

This thread is nearly 18 years old and it is marked as solved. Why are you answering to it?