Combining Logical Databases?

[Former Member]

Hi all,

I am using the logical database ADA in a program that I am writing. I need to combine ANLAV, ANLCV, and ANEPV into one super structure that I've created with our necessary fields. The super structure is made up of 4 other structures -- a header structure and 3 custom structure versions of ANLAV, ANLCV, and ANEPV.

I've set up 3 different internal tables and work areas. I currently have the following code to get the data from those tables:

tables: anlav, anlcv, anepv.
initialization.
  get anlav.
  move-corresponding anlav to wa_anlav.
  append wa_anlav to it_anlav.

  get anlcv.
  move-corresponding anlcv to wa_anlcv.
  append wa_anlcv to it_anlcv.

  get anepv.
  move-corresponding anepv to wa_anepv.
  append wa_anepv to it_anepv.

What would be the best way to join those three tables? I was considering the following (pseudocode):

loop at it_anlav into wa_ada.
  read it_anlcv into wa_ada1.
  read it_anepv into wa_ada2.
  move-corresponding wa_ada1 to wa_ada.
  move-corresponding wa_ada2 to wa_ada.
  collect wa_ada to it_ada.
endloop.

My worry is that I will miss some data in the process. I don't know if it's plausible, but for example, if ANLAV returns 10 records, ANLCV returns only 5, but ANEPV returns 15, then I imagine I would lose the extra five records in ANEPV.

Any helpful suggestions will be awarded points. Thanks in advance.

[Former Member]

Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.

Also, I am not very familiar with Logical Databases so if you have any other suggestions on the best way to do this, please let me know.

Thanks in advance.

[Former Member]

LDB makes the join of the possible tables (Parent-Child realationship) with the common key by nested selects.So finally you will get the common data. There is no loss data here.

[Former Member]

Thanks, Eswar. But how would you suggest that I combine those 3 tables (ANLAV, ANLCV, and ANEPV) into one super table? Would the pseudocode I wrote work?

[Former Member]

Hi,

OK..Try this..

DATA: V_it_anlav TYPE XFELD.

DATA: V_it_anlcv TYPE XFELD.

DATA: V_it_anepv TYPE XFELD.

DO.

CLEAR: WA_IT_ANLAV,

WA_IT_ANLCV,

WA_IT_ANEPV.

READ TABLE IT_ANLAV INTO WA_IT_ANLAV

INDEX SY-INDEX.

IF SY-SUBRC <> 0.

V_IT_ANLAV = 'X'.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE IT_ANLCV INTO WA_IT_ANLCV

INDEX SY-INDEX.

IF SY-SUBRC <> 0.

V_IT_ANLCV = 'X'.

ENDIF.

READ TABLE IT_ANEPV INTO WA_IT_ANEPV

INDEX SY-INDEX.

IF SY-SUBRC <> 0.

V_IT_ANEPV = 'X'.

ENDIF.

• Exit out of the loop if none of the three internal tables has records.

IF V_IT_ANLAV = 'X' AND

V_IT_ANLCV = 'X' AND

V_IT_ANEPV = 'X'.

EXIT.

ENDIF.

• Move the records to the output internal table.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING WA_IT_ANLAV TO WA_ADA.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING WA_IT_ANLCV TO WA_ADA.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING WA_IT_ANEPV TO WA_ADA.

APPEND WA_ADA TO IT_ADA.

ENDDO.

Hope this works..

THanks,

Naren

[Former Member]

Hi,

Please check my reply..

Thanks,

Naren

[RaymondGiuseppi]

Try something like

GET anlav.

CLEAR flag_anla.

GET anlcv.

CLEAR flag_anlc.

GET anepv.

CLEAR outtab.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING anepv TO outtab.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING anlcv TO outtab.

• clear cumulative fields (amounts, qty) of anlcv

MOVE 'X' to flag_anlc

move-corresponding anlav TO outtab.

• clear cumulative fields (amounts, qty) of anlav

MOVE 'X' TO flag_anla.

COLLECT outtab.

GET anlcv LATE.

CLEAR outtab.

IF flag_anlc IS INITIAL.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING anlcv TO outtab.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING anlav TO outtab.

• clear cumulative fields (amounts, qty) of anlav

MOVE 'X' TO flag_anla.

COLLECT outtab.

ENDIF.

GET anlcv LATE.

CLEAR outtab.

IF flag_anla IS INITIAL.

MOVE-CORRESPONDING anlav TO outtab.

COLLECT outtab.

ENDIF.

ENDIF.

regards

[Former Member]

Thanks, Naren. I rarely use "DO" so I didn't consider it.

Raymond, can you please explain in more detail how "LATE" works?

Thanks again, everyone.

[RaymondGiuseppi]

In logical database

- GET => read the data

- process lower level GET

- GET LATE => call after treatment of all lower level GET before reading next record of this level

process it like AT NEW / AT END

hoping to be understandable...