Additional environments?

[#1]

I suspect that I already know the answer to this one...

...but are there any options for getting additional environments / clients in the MTE world?

My specific requirement is around having for example a training client, where both config and data could reflect the live setup, but users could log on and execute training tasks (and similarly, having an environment where a full test migration could be carried out and reconciled, rather than having to test load data into a Q system where transactions already exist and reconciliation is difficult)?

I know that you can get an additional tenant - but my understanding is that this is stand alone and based on Best Practices (so basically like a starter system) - which is useful for doing Fit to Standard workshops for new scope items, but not a lot else.

Have things by any chance improved since I last looked - or does anyone have any creative ideas as to how I night solve these issues?

Thanks!

Clare

[former_member133276 · Accepted solution]

Hello gerard.koelmeyer - my client (MTE) is also looking for same answers here as well going into the ladder stage of Explore phase (around data migration strategy and general environment strategy) - Does SAP provide any documents / guides around these topics (and maybe STE vs MTE functionalities/comparisons)? Are there alternatives in MTE landscape besides default Q->P approach?

[Gerard1 · Accepted solution]

Hello, ddmitriyev. No - to my knowledge, MTE's landscape features Q and P, with a basic transport path between them. Per the document linked below, if your client seeks capability beyond what's provided by MTE, STE might be more appropriate.

[Gerard1]

These are fair comments, ccsmith. As I see it, MTE is deliberately simple, with complexity addressable by STE.

[former_member94298]

Thanks for the comments gerard.koelmeyer and simon.pang .

That seems to be a pretty hard steer towards STE which surprises me a bit. Is there nothing planned in the pipeline to address these issues in the MTE world?

STE whist addressing these environment issues might seem less attractive for a lot of other reasons (lack of some of the MTE specific functionality; lack of testing tools to make frequent release upgrades feasible...) - any additional information available about SAP's direction of travel? I know there are moves to blur the lines between STE and MTE a lot more.

[Gerard1]

ccsmith, you're right, MTE operates with a Q and P system approach. STE lends greater flexibility in this area. Please take a look at the STE Overview - in particular slide 38 - https://s4hanacloud.community.sap/groups/D82g0dYPzM13yAISfwL8EY/documents/ns2lkmYGCG5L46E3R7OAdd

[SimonPangChunYu]

Hi Clare,

STE may be one of the option. This is designed with 3-tier landscape with EXP, QAS & PRD. In QAS, this has few different clients for training, mock test & integration test.

If you only get the trial tenant in MTE, you may need to redo all configuration and import all extension objects in this trial tenant if you would like to synchronize the same configuration and extension items with Q tenant.

[former_member95896]

Hi Clare,

That is my understanding as well, we're boxed in with MTE when it comes to config and data for training.

-Ryan

[former_member94298]

Thanks.

I figured this might be the case. So basically, if I need MTE for some of the specific functionality only available there (e.g. Professional Services), then there is no way around the environment restrictions?