Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

New custom search criteria for opportunities

0 Kudos

Hi to all,

I want to expand the web gui view for search opportunities.

I have a new custom filed in the heder of the

opportunities named ZZORDERADM_H010, type BOOL, created with transaction EEWB.

The header is correctly update, the table CRMD_ORDERADM_H now contain my custom filed and it works fine

if i set it from web GUI (i've also extend the hedere view with the custom field).

Now want be able to use it as search criteria.

I follow the note nr 1336833.

I have extended the structure CRMST_QUERY_OPP_BTIL (and the struct CRMST_QUERY_OPP_AC_BTIL also )

with my new custom filed (i've made an append).

Then I mantain the table CRMVC_DQ form sm34.

I've made a new insertion under component BTopp like this:

BT BTQOpp ZZORDERADM_H0101 X Indica opzioni che sono disponibili ........................

The custom filed for search is now available, and i've extend the search view of WEB GUI with the new custom filed.

BUT the search DON'T WORK. Is like the the new custom field not influence the search!!!

With all the other search criteria blank, and mine valorized, the search returns all the opportunity entries;

instead it should return 2 records (i've made 2 test case with this custom fileld set at 'X'.)

The same result trying execute the query from transaction GENIL_BOL_BROWSER.

Please Help!


Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hello Davide,

If you want to use your new field in search, a BADI should be implemented. This is usually done for you by EEWB provided that you checked "PCUI extended search" at some point in the wizard. SAP should have changed this label because it is somehow confusing if your are using CRM5.2 onward versions... as PCUI has nothing to do with it!

So did you mark this checkbox?

If no, you can run the wizard again and everything will be fine.

Kind regards,

Nicolas Busson.

PS: badi name is CRM_RF_SEARCH_EEW

0 Kudos

thanks Nicolas,

you are right, i didn't have marked that checkbox.

thanks again.


Answers (0)