‎2009 Nov 06 7:53 PM
Hey guys,
Just wondering if anyone knows of a BAPI that will essentially simulate t-code:
KE13N
The reason I ask is because there is a field limitation of 9999, and that is WAY to small for us when we want to load our budget information.
Thanks guys!
‎2009 Nov 10 2:29 PM
In which version of R3/ECC do you work, there was such a limit til 46C (correction in OSS [Note 364159 - CO planning: short dump COMPUTE_INT_TIMES_OVERFLOW|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/364159])
In more recent version, look at [Note 1386177 - Planning processor: Max 9999 data cells on overview screen|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1386177]
Regards,
Raymond
‎2009 Nov 06 8:26 PM
‎2009 Nov 06 9:37 PM
Hi Rob,
Thanks for the response, yes...9999 limit...here is the EXACT error message:
"too many objects in the overview screen" Message no. K9071
Diagnosis:
When the overview screen was generated, such a large number of data records were found that more than 9999 data cells would have to be displayed on the overview screen. However, the system can only process up to 9999 data cells.
Any clue?
‎2009 Nov 06 10:02 PM
I have used BAPI_COPAPLANNING_POSTDATA to post relatively large amount of data in COPA, but never came across such message.
‎2009 Nov 09 3:53 PM
So I can use BAPI_COPAPLANNING_POSTDATA to simulate T-Code KE13N?
I'll have to look up more information on the FM.
‎2009 Nov 10 2:23 PM
I only got the 9999 error message when I use the t-code, but just to confirm, this FM is used to emulate the t-code that I mentioned?
‎2009 Nov 10 2:29 PM
In which version of R3/ECC do you work, there was such a limit til 46C (correction in OSS [Note 364159 - CO planning: short dump COMPUTE_INT_TIMES_OVERFLOW|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/364159])
In more recent version, look at [Note 1386177 - Planning processor: Max 9999 data cells on overview screen|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1386177]
Regards,
Raymond
‎2009 Nov 10 2:33 PM
Thank you Raymond! We are at 4.6, but I guess we can implement this note and we should be ok?
‎2009 Nov 10 2:44 PM
‎2009 Nov 10 2:49 PM
‎2009 Nov 10 2:50 PM
Raymond,
Sorry for all the questions, I'm still very new.
What do you mean by the internal counter? Where would I check this?
‎2009 Nov 10 2:52 PM
‎2009 Nov 10 3:52 PM
Hey Raymond,
Looks like I found the error, it's in this routine:
FORM compute_id USING it_tupel TYPE yt_comp
it_length TYPE yt_comp
CHANGING e_id TYPE y_idp.
Berechnung der id erfolgt nach dem Horner-Schema:
DATA: t_tupel TYPE yt_comp,
component LIKE LINE OF t_tupel.
Vorbereitung:
LOOP AT it_tupel INTO component.
SUBTRACT 1 FROM component.
APPEND component TO t_tupel.
ENDLOOP.
DATA: length LIKE LINE OF it_length, "Länge der i-ten Hierarchietab.
index_from TYPE i VALUE 2, "Aufsetzindex für Schema
id TYPE i, "Zwischenergebnis für e_id
idp TYPE y_idp.
Startwert zur Berechnung von id versorgen:
READ TABLE t_tupel INDEX 1 INTO id.
idp = id.
Durchführung der Berechnung der id (Horner-Schema):
LOOP AT t_tupel INTO component FROM index_from.
READ TABLE it_length INDEX sy-tabix INTO length.
idp = idp * length + component.
ENDLOOP.
e_id = idp + 1.
ENDFORM.
My guess is that it's appending to t_tupel, which is defined as a Type I, which is limited to only a four-byte integer, hence the 9999 limitation.
Is there ANY way around this?
Like I said, the OS Note doesn't apply to us cause we are at 6.04. Any other thoughts?
‎2010 May 25 3:52 PM
Were you able to find a solution for this? I am having the same issue.