IBP extractors (extending or own) vs tables

[JaySchwendemann]

Dear all,

• we have a situation where we use the Add-On for IBP in ERP
• We use time-series-based integration.
• We now have the requirement to have the following fields exposed to IBP

1. MRP Controller (MARC-DISPO)'s name (T024D-DSNAM)
2. Material group (MARA-MATKL)' description (T023T-WGBEZ)

• Despite of MARA / MAKT texts (with Extractor /IBP/PRODUCT_TEXT) we do not see any standard extractors for MARC texts. There is IBP/LOCATIONPRODUCT_ATTR (withouth Language field) but there isn't a IBP/LOCATIONPRODUCT_TEXT or the like

From my understanding (that can be easily wrong or incomplete) we have the following options

• Expose the necessary tables T024D and T023T directly via CPI-DS to IPB and do the join in CPI-DS
• Extend (where possible, e.g. /IBP/PRODUCT_TEXT) the standard extractor and create a custom own extractor e.g. ZIBP_LOCATIONPRODUCT_TEXT where none standard exists

Currently I'm leaning towards exposing the tables directly, but I'd like to get some insights / opinions what's best practice here.

Thanks and cheers

Jens

[former_member194529]

Hi Jens,

Did you get any solutions for your requirement? If yes, please feel free to share it here.

Best,

Ivan

[JaySchwendemann · Accepted solution]

Dear all,

for the sake of completeness here's what we've done.

We exposed the text tables directly and did join the texts within CI-DS data flow at runtime to the existing standard extractor IBP/LOCATIONPRODUCT_ATTR.

We opted for this as we did not see huge benefits to create our own extractors and runtime of the data flow is not a huge deal.

If you feel different, please let me know.

PS: As this question was closed once because of inactivity, I would mark this as solution, please feel free to comment anyways