Pbm with choosing right SCV

[Former Member]

Hi

I have multiple Legacies, and couple of R-3 instances in a landscape.Initially there was a decision to choose separate SCVs for each System in the landscape like

System_R3_1.0

Legacy1_1.0

Legacy1_2.0

Legacy1_3.0

Namespaces will be defined interface wise under the specific SCV.

As a general design design, we decided to have mappings in the target interface Namespace.

During interface design we found that we had complex multimapping scenarios both inbound and outbound to R3.

In case of Inbound R-3, where we have the mapping under the R3 SCV inbound interface namespace, we multimapped by creating a usage dependency between Legacy1 and R3.But in case of a multimapping reqm't for another interface InBound to LEGACY and outbound to R3, I cannot have the same facility, as the dependency enables legacy structures to be imported into only R3 namespace and not vice versa.

How do I overcome this problem.??

Other solution I can think of is having a single SCV and having all the R-3, Legacies defined under multiple namespaces but considering the number of interfaces per legacy , it turns out to be a bit unmanageable number under single SCV..

One another solution is to always have the multimappings in the outbound R3 system, but we want to avoid this for design reasons..

Please let me know your views on this!!!

[Former Member]

Hi Sriram,

This is a known problem. There are two solutions on the way.

If it is a message split, from (i think) SP15 a Integration Process is not needed for messagesplitting anymore

from (i hope) SP16 SAP is going to solve the problem that you only can use interfaces from one SWCV.

But for now the only way is dependecies (which you found out, can cause problems) or create the interface double, one in the right SWCV and one in the SWCV where the Integration Process is part of.

Cheers,

Frank

[Former Member]

Hi Frank

Thanks for the response, but that would mean I have to always maintain copy of my source message structure in the target SWCV as well..Sheeks that would a pbm'tic solution because whenever there is a change in one datatype in the source, I will have to run around to every other SWCV where it is being used..!!

Thanks for your help on this!!

In case I use standard SCV say SAPAPPL for maintaining IDOCs and RFCs and create dependencies to my interface implementations for R3 and legacy interfaces ,

Qn 1) will there be any issue say during transports between XI dev-QA-Prod instances??

Qn 2) Will there be any issues during change to a completely new SCV version in a future upgrade!!

I know these are pretty vague question but was hoping for some info before I pain SAP support with queries..!!

[Former Member]

Hi Sriram,

I gave SAP support already the pain and the answer to maintain the interface double was theirs. You won't have any problems with transportations.

The real problem you could get is, if you make dependencies from one SWCV to two other ones, which both contain the same SAP IDOC/RFC's, but different structures (ZBAPI or ZIDOC's). Because they have the same namespace (SAP only uses one namespace) they are seen as the same interface.

Cheers,

Frank