Wrong major change in new MSDS version

[Former Member]

Hi,

I got some complaints that customers were getting a new major MSDS version that contained actually no major change at all. We have the option to mark all major changes on a MSDS activated. When checking the changes showed on the particular MSDS, there was actual no change at all compared to the previous version (although it was marked as a change). There were some smaller minor changes in other parts of the MSDS but no real major change. The effect is that we get new major releases for a MSDS without proper reason. In that way the refresh rate with major releases is going too fast.

I also discovered that some times a change was marked in a table while actually the line below the marked line was changed. It looks like the comparing of the value file of a potential new version is not working properly.

Does anyone of you recognize this problem? I am afraid I have to send in an issue to SAP for this.

Regards,

Paul

[Former Member]

I can give some feedback now. I have contacted SAP via OSS. According to SAP our problem is caused by the fact that the expert system we are using is deleting property values and creating new ones. In some cases the new value is exactly the same as the old value. SAP is stating that in the process that is deciding if a new MSDS needs to be created, the system is comparing the value file but also is  looking if a change document has been created. If this is the case we have a lot of unnecessary hits. I am wondering if this is really the case. Our provider of the expert server software would have a big problem and all of their customers would face the same problem. At the moment I have the issue addressed to them.

[christoph_bergemann]

Dear Paul

quite interesting feedback. I was not aware of the fact that SAT uses in the solution a "change document" to make proposal for "major" version. This really is a surprise on my side

Coming back to your general topics: expert rules are used quite often: We have similar approach; and we do not have an issue which i am aware of in "marking" and/or getting "new version". I am not 100% sure if we folllow the same approach like you described (we are using is deleting property values and creating new ones. ) but just are able to "update" the existing data record.

In my opinion your approach is "wrong" (not knowing the details what a provider delivers).

I would assume this: we have an "ABAP" part for the "EHS Expert" and we have a "rule" part (plus database).

The "ABAP" part is encapsulated in a function module. which you normally enter in customizing. My current understanding here is that one would use in 99.9% of the cases the "SAP standard" function moduel and my current understanindg is as well that exactly this function module is "responsible" for the "update" part in EHS datamodel. So if this story is correct it does not help to get in touch with content provider (as long as <> SAP) but to get in touch with SAP via OSS once again.

Quite interesting feedback from SAP  any case. I will check this next week in our system

C.B.

[christoph_bergemann]

Deal Paul

it is not easy to judge what is "wrong". We would ned more information. Which SAP release do you use? Which WWI version do you use? Do you use only SAP standard symbols in your template? etc.

On top quesiotn as: how did you define generaiton variant? Are you using "reference" / Inherotance" in your data constellation? There are so many reasons ....

E.g. check:

MOst of the discussion running here is "how ro mark" correct and no "why do i get new major version"

Did you execute a "comparison" in the reports (using CG50 options)?

C.B.

PS: as Mark pointed out. do not mix "change marks" with "new major version". For new major version you need "simply" a "relevance" indicator  Iand you can still release then a "minor" version according to SAP standard even you have the proposal to release major one).

[Former Member]

Hi Christoph,

I will look at the links you provided.

The comparison tool in SAP is not working correctly. SAP is sending a document, but Word is not started. Instead a screen is opened showing the local SAP folder (linked to my user). I don't know why this is happening, but I have no time at the moment to solve it (the major change issue has higher priority). Instead I "downloaded " the 2 MSDS-versions and used the Word compare function. This is doing the same trick. However I can't see any changes that should result in a major change. Reference is only used for DG-properties.

As written above, I only wanted to see why a major release was created as it should be only a minor release because only properties without relevant flag were changed. The highlighted changes are not helping unfortunately. Finally the major release issue that couldn't be explained, also brought in the daylight that we have an issue with the change marks: they are not doing what they should do. If fear that the origin of this last issue is causing also the issue with the wrong major version.

We don't have standard SAP, but use the IHS calculation tool (Atrion) to calculate the data. It brings its own properties with it.

Regards,

Paul

[christoph_bergemann]

Dear Paul,

in context of:

The comparison tool in SAP is not working correctly. SAP is sending a document, but Word is not started. Instead a screen is opened showing the local SAP folder (linked to my user). I don't know why this is happening, but I have no time at the moment to solve it (the major change issue has higher priority).

in my opionion your local WWI installation is corrupt (tehre is a "similar thread". ). This should have highest priority as you can not work really using your local WWI environment

This would be my proposal:

you can e.g. use output variant "VALUATION" or "EXCEL". If i remember correct: you should get indication if a "relevance flag" is set (onyl for porpeties; sorry) . I assume on the top that you did not changed references and you did not update DG data.

if you have good understanding of WWI remplate you can try to find properties (or identifiers) which contain relevant data records and therefore SAP propose to have a "major version"

For:

However I can't see any changes that should result in a major change.

This is the "wrong" approach. The "major version relevance" is only ! triggered by "relevance indicator". If you use Word Compare function you can only see what changed. But you still don't know asap if the data (which is changed) is "relevant"

in context

We don't have standard SAP, but use the IHS calculation tool (Atrion) to calculate the data

We need to differentiate.

a.) do you use SAP standard data model?  according to your answer. No; you use own properties

b.) not knowing the details but i would assume "IHS Calcaulation of Atrion) is done using EHS expert server? Here I have no clue if the "calculation" done is "such" clever that during writing of data to database as well "relevance" indicator is set

But if I read your comment: It brings its own properties with it. => as long as the data model is more or less the same (you have usage, user defined text etc. per property) there is no difference (or should not be) if you would use SAP standard properties.

In context of:

Finally the major release issue that couldn't be explained, also brought in the daylight that we have an issue with the change marks: they are not doing what they should do

I am sorry. SAP did really improved over the yars SAP EHS. My experience with change marks /and or set of major version) in SAP standard is quite old. And now (if you use proper set up) you have change marks not on "day" basis but on "day + time" basis (never investigated here: Sorry).

(PS discussion of change makrs (why the yhave been set ir why they are missing) can be really frustrating.... you must have deep knowlegde on WWI and data maintenance topics to answer such questions (and if you use customer specific symbols. Thius can be hard work as well); even: if you have "complex" WWI template only using SAP Satdnadr symbols it is very very hard work to understand "Change mark" settikng in WWI (and theer is a "slight" risk of WWI versio you use. Always use most up to date version in most up to date Windows etc. environment)

C.B.

PS;: Change Marking - Basic Data and Tools (EHS-BD) - SAP Library

here online help is explainig that change marks are set on "day basis". I am pretty sure that this not "true" any more. As part of a SP or EnhPack SAP improved this so that you have now "time" basis; may be i can find this and then i will share

PPS: Change marking / Relevance Indicator&amp;nbsp; / in... | SCN

could be of interest as well.

Last PPS: just found the link: This link explain the topic of "time based" change marks

https://www.consolut.com/en/s/sap-ides-access/d/s/doc/YY-CATEEHSPS_EHP3_007

Explanation starts as:

Description

Change marks are used to identify relevant changes to specification data when EH&S reports are issued. Depending on whether relevant changes have been displayed in a report, the relevance indicator is selected for this report and a version is made.

To ensure that the change marks are precise, the change date and the exact time of the change (date and time) are recorded for the mark.

[christoph_bergemann]

Dear Paul

if you are willing to invest time in analysis of data: check data at which the old report was generated (not relase. GENERATED is the key topic) Check then data changes on the scpecification happened since that day. For this you can use

OPtion 1:) a standard SAP report => here you can focus on ESTDU entris only: You should get good result (report RSSCD110;  Creation of Change Documents for Specifications - Basic Data and Tools (EHS-BD) - SAP Library)

OPtio 2.) change change docsument from hit list (check ) or

and

and many others => could take more time as you will get all changes (and not only ESTDU related ones)

Check e.g. as well: Note 874191 - Evaluation of specification changes

C.B.

[Former Member]

Hi Cristoph,

As written I managed to do a comparison in Word directly, so I know what the differences are in text output between the versions. Also I already checked if a change was made to the property in a large period before the generation of the new version, but this was not the case (I used the change document report for this). We keep the change docs (as described in option 2) for the last 3 years.

I am aware that the control of a major version is solely depending on the activ flag and not on the content. The expert server process is setting the activ flag automatically when calculating and changing the data. The way the properties are set-up is the same as "standard" SAP, so as you write this should work exactly the same.

I think the most options you were referring to I already checked beforehand (but I am glad you were looking in the same direction). However I will look what the impact of the time stamp is for the relevant changes with respect to the automatic process using the worklist with possible changes.

Regards,

Paul 

[christoph_bergemann]

Dear Paul

thanks for explanation: which value do you use in generation variant (0, 1 or 2) for handling change marks?? This value might have an indirect effect on "relevance"

One "potential" idea is: between report X and report Y you have

1.) changed WWI layout

2.) change WWI version used

3.) chaneg definition of gen variant (e.g. moved from valeu 1 to 2 for change marks)

But this might have only effects on the "change marks" and not the relevance topic

Year ago (8 years??; can not remember) I know only taht e..g if you generate a report on day X and you exchange a "reference" on same data and you regenerate the report (depending on set up of gen variant) the report as "relevant" (even if there was no change form "data point of view"

PS: may be Change marking / Relevance Indicator&amp;nbsp; / in... | SCN is of interest as well

C.B.

[Former Member]

Hi Christoph,

The key-user made some small changes in the template between the 2 versions (big changes are my responsibility). The WWI version was not changed and the settings of the variant were also not changed.

I will go-on with the investigations.

Regards,

Paul

PS: with respect to SAP functionality of comparing reports, an environment parameter has to be customized. When searching the internet I see 2 different environment parameters mentioned (report_comp_executable and reports_compare_ext). I see the last one in our system with value WWI  and get  the impression that the necessary parameter has changed in the past?  Am I correct?

[christoph_bergemann]

Dear Paul

question: you have one specification in the system. For this specifciation you identify this "strange" effect during report generation

1.) is there any "parallel" report at the same specification (e.g. SDS/MSDS DE and SDS/MSDS FR)and you have the same effect (in most cases data is "slightly" different

2.) By using "debug" you can stop the "Create report process" at that point in time there the value file is generated; if have done a short survey. SAP uses some "central" fuunction module to detect if report is relevant or not; the "issue" is only. You need to analyze any data read and any data record passed to the process to identfy the data element" which gives rise for the "relevance"; quite tricky but possible

3.) do you have a "quality" system with may be the same data situation? if yes: you can try to work on the WWI layout. E.g. prepare onyl a WWI layout for chapter 2 , 3, 4... and try to identify which chapter is "problematic". You can do the same in prod system (but only as the last chance)

C.B:

[christoph_bergemann]

Dear Paul

by some inquiry i found this thread:

After "rereading" it: i have the impression that may be  the "relevance" topic is depending on correct "nesting" in WWI. In this example: one data record is "relevant", But two data records are marked in report. In test in our environment: i was not able to get the same.

C.B.

[Mark-Pfister]

Hello Paul,

Did you check the following OSS Note:

1119071 - FAQs about change marking in EH&S reports:

[7] Question: Do change marks that were made during report generation affect the relevancy indicator of the dates?

[8] Question: Which values/changes can be marked in a report?

[9] Question:Must the change mark be activated to determine the relevancy indicator for a report?

If a new main version is being generated has to do with the "Relvant" Flag on the report header - and (unfortunately) not with visible changes on the document....

Hope this helps

Mark

[Former Member]

Hi Mark,

Yes I am aware of this note and how a major change should be detected based on relevant flags. However this is not the issue.

The initial problem is that a major release was not expected. When looking at the change marks of the latest version we saw that SAP discovered a major change where actually no major change was made: the content of the property was nether touched in the meanwhile. However the indicated change had of course a relevant flag.This is not OK.

Regards,

Paul