on 2016 Apr 04 9:00 PM
Have a quick design question.
When designing Fixed Asset Planning in BPC, do you typically maintain a subnumber dimension?
In ECC asset accounting is typically done by Asset and Sub number combination.
Option 1) Concatinate Sub Number while populating Asset MD in BPC
Option 2) Maintain a separate dimension for sub number in BPC
My only concern is the volume of data. Typically there can be 10 sub numbers hence the high volume of Asset master data will become 10 times bigger in BPC. Also it doesn't feel right to maintain a dimension for sub number.
Just polling to see how others handled it elsewhere.
Thanks
~Dilkins
Request clarification before answering.
In some cases it's possible to plan on the asset class level....
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Andrew,
If you don't need to plan on subnumbers then it is better to concatenate with asset.
Andy
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 8 | |
| 8 | |
| 3 | |
| 3 | |
| 2 | |
| 2 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.