cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Error in ME59

Former Member
0 Kudos

When  we are executing ME59 in background  with background jobs userid I am getting error  "Contract nos. in header and item must agree me59" in Log

But when I executed same variant with my sap id I  did not get any error & PO created.

What can be the reason for the same.

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (4)

Answers (4)

Prasoon
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi,

   Seems strange. Can you create similar variant in ME59N (not ME59) and test the same in background and share the feedback.

   Also share your system details with EHP.

Regards,

AKPT

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Kiran

Is it that the selection criteria in ME59 is captured in a variant and the same variant is used to run the job in background and foreground

and in background system gives error and foreground no error?

Regards

Jayaram

Former Member
0 Kudos

Yes your understanding is correct.

BijayBarik
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

What is input criteria when you execute  ME59 with your user ID and what is input value/values picks with by background job with ME59?

JL23
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

can you post a screenshot of the users log. Maybe it is possible to identify the message number there. From the text it looks very much home made.

Where you do actually enter a contract number in the PO header?

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Jurgen,

Below is the log. Sorry for the incomplete information.

Kiran

JL23
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Can it be that there are several items with different contract numbers which are tried to club together into a single PO with ME59?

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Jurgen,

I have executed with same variant which is used in background job. PO created by me in ME59 has same contracts in all the lines. Is it so that ME59 cannot club PR's of different contracts for same vendor ?

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Jurgen,

Can you please reply to above.

Thanks

JL23
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

ME59 was replaced with ME59N when R3 4.6c was released, and transactions such as ME59 are no longer supported since 2013 (which is already 10 years after the release)

So I would suggest to bring your batch job over to the new report RM06BB30 and then see if you still encounter the same issue.