Hello,

Sign up to join our community!

Welcome Back,

Please sign in to your account!

Forgot Password,

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

You must login to ask a question.

You must login to send a message.

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Welcome To SAPEWM HELP

Ask questions and get real answers from real Experts. Get instant solutions for your SAP Extended Warehouse Management ABAP FICO BASIS and other Modules challenges. Experts from SAP community will help you resolve you issues, optimize processes, and provide guidance.

Our Statistics

  • Questions 237
  • Answers 37
  • Best Answers 0
  • Users 14
  1. SAP TM–EWM integration is powerful but often fails due to unclear process ownership and poor orchestration design. In real projects, most issues are not technical — they are design and governance mistakes. Below are the most common mistakes observed in productive implementations and how to avoid theRead more

    SAP TM–EWM integration is powerful but often fails due to unclear process ownership and poor orchestration design. In real projects, most issues are not technical — they are design and governance mistakes.

    Below are the most common mistakes observed in productive implementations and how to avoid them.


    🔴 1. Not Defining “System of Record” (Source of Truth)

    ❌ Common Mistake:

    Teams do not clearly define:

    • Who owns the delivery?

    • Who owns freight order updates?

    • Who controls execution status?

    This leads to:

    • Inconsistent status updates

    • Duplicate changes

    • Confusion during testing


    ✅ Best Practice:

    Object System of Record
    Sales / Purchase Delivery ERP
    Freight Order (FO) TM
    Transportation Unit (TU) EWM (if yard active)
    Handling Unit (HU) EWM
    Freight Cost TM

    👉 Clearly document this in your blueprint phase.


    🔴 2. Incorrect Process Orchestration (TM vs EWM Timing)

    ❌ Common Mistake:

    Freight Order (FO) is planned in TM before:

    • Delivery is fully warehouse-ready

    • Picking is confirmed

    Result:

    • FO status mismatch

    • Delayed updates

    • Manual corrections


    ✅ Best Practice:

    Define a strict event sequence:

    1. Delivery created in ERP

    2. Freight planning in TM

    3. Freight Order created

    4. TU created & distributed to EWM

    5. EWM executes picking & loading

    6. Loading confirmation updates TM

    👉 Use event-based integration, not manual synchronization.


    🔴 3. Dock Appointment Conflicts

    ❌ Common Mistake:

    Dock scheduling controlled in TM while EWM also manages door activities.

    Result:

    • Double booking

    • Yard execution conflicts

    • Resource planning chaos


    ✅ Best Practice:

    • If Yard Management is active in EWM → Let EWM control door & dock

    • TM should handle planning level

    • EWM should handle execution level

    👉 Separate planning from execution clearly.


    🔴 4. Poor Message Monitoring Strategy

    ❌ Common Mistake:

    Teams check only:

    • SMQ1 / SMQ2
      But ignore:

    • Application logs

    • Integration framework errors

    • Status mapping issues

    This makes troubleshooting extremely slow.


    ✅ Best Practice:

    Define a monitoring checklist:

    ✔ Check queues (SMQ1 / SMQ2)
    ✔ Check application logs (SLG1)
    ✔ Monitor delivery status mapping
    ✔ Track freight order event messages
    ✔ Document integration error handling procedure

    👉 Always include monitoring in design phase, not after go-live.


    🔴 5. No Clear Responsibility Split Between Teams

    ❌ Common Mistake:

    Warehouse team blames TM team.
    TM team blames EWM team.

    Because ownership was never defined.


    ✅ Best Practice:

    Create a Responsibility Matrix:

    Process Step Responsible System Responsible Team
    Freight Planning TM Transportation Team
    Picking EWM Warehouse Team
    Freight Settlement TM Logistics Finance
    Loading Confirmation EWM Warehouse Execution

    👉 Governance prevents escalation chaos.


    🔴 6. Ignoring Status Mapping Design

    ❌ Common Mistake:

    Status profiles in TM and EWM are not aligned.

    Result:

    • FO not updated after loading

    • Delivery shows inconsistent status

    • Business confusion


    ✅ Best Practice:

    • Align status mapping early

    • Test all execution scenarios:

      • Partial picking

      • Partial loading

      • Cancellation

      • Reversal

    Status synchronization is critical.


    🔴 7. Over-Customization of Standard Integration

    ❌ Common Mistake:

    Enhancing standard integration without strong reason:

    • Custom BAdIs

    • Manual status updates

    • Hard-coded logic

    This breaks standard event flow.


    ✅ Best Practice:

    Use standard integration framework wherever possible.
    Enhance only if:

    • Business case is strong

    • Impact is clearly documented


    🔑 Key Lessons from Real Projects

    ✔ Define system ownership before configuration
    ✔ Design process sequence clearly
    ✔ Separate planning (TM) from execution (EWM)
    ✔ Create monitoring & error-handling playbook
    ✔ Test real-life exception scenarios
    ✔ Avoid unnecessary custom development


    🚀 Why TM–EWM Projects Fail (Reality)

    Most failures happen because:

    • Integration is treated as “technical setup”

    • Process governance is ignored

    • No cross-team ownership model exists

    Successful projects treat TM–EWM integration as:

    A process orchestration design — not just system connectivity.


    See less
  2. Designing an Efficient & Audit-Compliant Physical Inventory Strategy in SAP EWM Designing a Physical Inventory (PI) process in SAP EWM for large, 24/7 warehouses requires balancing audit compliance, system performance, and operational continuity. A well-designed PI strategy should minimize businRead more

    Designing an Efficient & Audit-Compliant Physical Inventory Strategy in SAP EWM

    Designing a Physical Inventory (PI) process in SAP EWM for large, 24/7 warehouses requires balancing audit compliance, system performance, and operational continuity. A well-designed PI strategy should minimize business disruption while ensuring full traceability of inventory adjustments.

    Below are best-practice design principles used in real SAP EWM projects.


    🔹 1. Full PI vs Continuous PI (Cycle Counting) – Recommended Approach

    ✔ Avoid Pure Annual Full PI

    • Annual full PI in large warehouses causes:

      • Operational downtime

      • Performance issues

      • Increased error rates

    • Use full PI only for audit reconciliation or exception handling

    ✔ Prefer Continuous PI (Cycle Counting)

    Recommended approach:

    • Use cycle counting as the primary PI method

    • Schedule small, frequent PI documents

    • Count bins/products based on risk and movement frequency

    👉 This approach satisfies auditors while keeping operations running.


    🔹 2. Designing PI Areas & Counting Intervals

    ✔ Define PI Areas Strategically

    Create PI areas based on:

    • Storage type (high rack, picking, bulk, VAS)

    • Operational criticality

    • Access restrictions

    Example:

    • High-rack storage → Quarterly PI

    • Picking areas → Monthly PI

    • Fast-moving SKUs → More frequent counts


    ✔ Use ABC Classification

    • A-class products → Frequent PI

    • B-class products → Medium frequency

    • C-class products → Annual or semi-annual PI

    👉 This reduces workload and improves accuracy where it matters most.


    🔹 3. Controlling & Documenting Inventory Differences (Audit Focus)

    ✔ Enforce Difference Reason Codes

    • Mandatory reason codes for all PI differences

    • Separate codes for:

      • Damage

      • Theft

      • Process error

      • System issue

    👉 Auditors expect clear business justification for every difference.


    ✔ Block Automatic Posting of Differences

    Best practice:

    • Do not allow direct difference posting

    • Route differences through:

      • Supervisor review

      • Approval workflow

    This ensures:

    • Accountability

    • Reduced incorrect postings


    🔹 4. Authorization & Approval Design for Audit Compliance

    ✔ Segregation of Duties (SoD)

    Design roles such that:

    • Counter ≠ Approver ≠ Poster

    • No single user can:

      • Count

      • Approve

      • Post differences

    👉 This is a key audit requirement.


    ✔ Use Change Logs & Application Logs

    • Activate change documents

    • Use application logs for:

      • PI creation

      • Difference posting

      • Recount triggers

    This provides:

    • Full traceability

    • “Who changed what and when”


    🔹 5. Performance Best Practices for Large PI Volumes

    ✔ Avoid Large PI Documents

    • Do not create PI documents for thousands of bins at once

    • Split PI documents by:

      • Storage type

      • Area

      • Product group


    ✔ Schedule PI Jobs During Low Activity

    • Create and process PI documents during:

      • Night shifts

      • Low-volume windows

    • Avoid peak outbound periods


    ✔ Monitor System Load

    • Track PI-related queues and logs

    • Monitor background job runtime

    👉 This prevents performance degradation in productive systems.


    🔹 6. Recommended End-to-End PI Design (Summary)

    ✔ Continuous PI as primary strategy
    ✔ Risk-based counting (ABC analysis)
    ✔ Mandatory difference reasons
    ✔ Supervisor approval before posting
    ✔ Strict role segregation
    ✔ Small, controlled PI documents
    ✔ Regular audit reporting


    See less
  3. Stock mismatch between SAP EWM and ERP is a very common production issue and usually indicates that a posting or synchronization step was interrupted or bypassed. Even when no open tasks or queues are visible, inconsistencies can still exist at a deeper level. Below is a practical, real-project trouRead more

    Stock mismatch between SAP EWM and ERP is a very common production issue and usually indicates that a posting or synchronization step was interrupted or bypassed. Even when no open tasks or queues are visible, inconsistencies can still exist at a deeper level.

    Below is a practical, real-project troubleshooting guide.

    1. Understand Where the Mismatch Exists First
    Before correcting anything, identify where the inconsistency originates.

    Check:
    – /SCWM/MON for EWM stock
    – MMBE / MB52 for ERP stock
    – Compare storage location, batch, and stock type

    This helps decide whether EWM or ERP is the leading system for correction.

    2. Check for Incomplete or Failed Posting Changes
    Posting changes are a top reason for mismatches.

    – Check open or canceled posting changes in /SCWM/MON
    – Verify whether posting changes were confirmed in EWM but not posted to ERP

    3. Verify Physical Inventory Posting in Both Systems
    Even if PI documents are closed:
    – Verify PI posting in EWM
    – Check ERP material documents related to PI

    4. Check qRFC Queues Carefully
    Recheck SMQ1 / SMQ2 for:
    – Stock synchronization queues
    – Old or previously failed messages

    5. Analyze Application Logs
    Check SLG1 with objects:
    – /SCWM/ERP
    – /SCWM/PI
    – /SCWM/POST

    6. Check for Manual ERP Movements
    Ensure no goods movements were posted directly in ERP using MIGO.

    7. Validate Stock Type and Availability Group Mapping
    Ensure EWM stock types are correctly mapped to ERP stock types.

    Safest Way to Correct Stock Differences:
    – If EWM stock is correct, adjust ERP stock
    – If ERP stock is correct, adjust EWM stock using posting change or correction tools

    Never delete stock directly from database tables.

    In most real projects, stock mismatch is caused by incomplete posting changes, PI issues, manual ERP postings, or mapping errors.

    See less
  4. SAP EWM Warehouse Task Not Created After Inbound Delivery When an inbound delivery is successfully distributed to SAP EWM but Warehouse Tasks (WTs) are not created, the issue is usually related to process configuration gaps or missing master data, even if everything appears correct at first glance.BRead more

    SAP EWM Warehouse Task Not Created After Inbound Delivery

    When an inbound delivery is successfully distributed to SAP EWM but Warehouse Tasks (WTs) are not created, the issue is usually related to process configuration gaps or missing master data, even if everything appears correct at first glance.
    Below is a systematic checklist based on real project experience.


    🔍 1. Check Inbound Delivery Item Status

    • Go to /SCWM/MON

    • Navigate to the inbound delivery item

    • Verify the status:

      • “Putaway Relevance” must be active

      • Delivery item must be released for warehouse processing

    👉 If the delivery is not released, WT creation will not trigger.


    🔍 2. Verify Warehouse Process Type (WPT)

    Check whether the correct Warehouse Process Type is determined:

    • Go to SPRO → EWM → Goods Receipt → Warehouse Task → Define Warehouse Process Type

    • Ensure:

      • Putaway relevance is active

      • Correct stock removal/placement control is set

      • Confirmation control is not blocking WT creation

    👉 Wrong or incomplete WPT is one of the most common causes.


    🔍 3. Check Putaway Strategy & Storage Type Search

    • Verify Putaway Strategy in:

      • Product master (warehouse view)

      • Storage type search sequence

    • Ensure:

      • At least one storage type is found

      • Storage type allows putaway

      • No capacity or bin restriction blocks WT creation

    👉 If no valid storage type/bin is found, WT will not be created.


    🔍 4. Check Product Master Data

    In /SCWM/MAT1, confirm:

    • Putaway control indicator is maintained

    • Storage section / storage type indicators are correct

    • Handling Unit requirement matches the process

    • Batch/SLED settings (if applicable) are consistent

    👉 Missing or incorrect product master data often blocks task creation silently.


    🔍 5. Check Warehouse Task Creation Settings

    • Verify whether WT creation is:

      • Manual

      • Automatic

      • Triggered by PPF

    • If PPF is used:

      • Check PPF action status

      • Ensure action is processed successfully

    👉 If WT creation is set to manual, system will not create tasks automatically.


    🔍 6. Check Queue & Warehouse Order Settings

    • Ensure a valid queue is determined

    • Check:

      • Queue assignment

      • Warehouse Order Creation Rules (WOCR)

    • Incorrect queue determination may prevent WT processing.


    🔍 7. Check Application Logs & Queues

    Always check:

    • SLG1 – Application logs for hidden errors

    • SMQ1 / SMQ2 – qRFC queues for stuck messages

    👉 Many WT creation issues are visible only in logs, not on the UI.


    ✅ Final Recommendation (Real Project Insight)

    In most productive systems, WT not created after inbound delivery is caused by:

    1. Incorrect or incomplete Warehouse Process Type

    2. Missing putaway strategy or storage type

    3. Product master data gaps

    4. Delivery not released for warehouse processing

    5. PPF or queue-related issues

    See less
  5. This issue is commonly caused by RF framework configuration gaps or process inconsistencies. Below is a systematic troubleshooting approach based on real project experience. 🔍 1. Check Warehouse Task Confirmation Status Go to /SCWM/MON Verify whether the WT is: Fully confirmed Partially confirmed ReRead more

    This issue is commonly caused by RF framework configuration gaps or process inconsistencies. Below is a systematic troubleshooting approach based on real project experience.


    🔍 1. Check Warehouse Task Confirmation Status

    • Go to /SCWM/MON

    • Verify whether the WT is:

      • Fully confirmed

      • Partially confirmed

      • Reversed automatically

    • Ensure no follow-up WT is generated and left open

    👉 Stock will not update if WT confirmation is incomplete.


    🔍 2. Verify RF Logical Transaction & Screen Sequence

    • Go to /SCWM/RFUI

    • Check:

      • Logical transaction assigned correctly

      • Screen sequence includes confirmation screen

      • No screen is skipped due to incorrect control parameters

    👉 Missing confirmation screen can cause logical completion but no physical stock update.


    🔍 3. Validate Warehouse Process Type (WPT)

    • Ensure correct WPT is determined for RF picking

    • Check:

      • Stock removal strategy

      • Confirmation control

      • HU requirement settings

    👉 Wrong WPT may confirm WT without posting stock movement.


    🔍 4. Check Queue & Warehouse Order Creation Rules (WOCR)

    • Incorrect queue or WOCR may:

      • Delay posting

      • Assign WT to wrong resource

    • Reprocess and confirm again


    🔍 5. Inspect Posting Change & Stock Type Settings

    • Verify whether:

      • Posting change is required

      • Stock type (Available / Quality / Blocked) is changing

    • Incorrect stock type mapping can appear as “no update”


    🔍 6. Check RF User & Resource Assignment

    • Ensure:

      • RF user is correctly mapped to resource

      • Resource is active and logged on

    • Incorrect resource assignment may cause background rollback


    🔍 7. Application Logs & Queue Monitoring

    • Check:

      • SLG1 (Application Log)

      • SMQ1 / SMQ2 queues

    • Look for delayed or stuck updates


    ✅ Final Recommendation

    In most projects, this issue is caused by:

    • Incorrect RF screen sequence

    • Missing confirmation control in WPT

    • Resource not properly assigned

    Once RF flow and WPT are aligned, stock updates correctly in real time.


    See less
  6. Hi Marianne, You can get it. follow these steps. Get DOCID from /SCDL/PROCH_I or /SCDL/PROCH_O table by passing document number Pass DOCID in /SCWM/ORDIM_O and /SCWM/ORDIM_C table and get all open/confirmed tasks. let me know if you need further help on this.

    Hi Marianne,

    You can get it. follow these steps.

    Get DOCID from /SCDL/PROCH_I or /SCDL/PROCH_O table by passing document number

    Pass DOCID in /SCWM/ORDIM_O and /SCWM/ORDIM_C table and get all open/confirmed tasks.

    let me know if you need further help on this.

    See less
  7. DATA: lo_spfd TYPE REF TO /scdl/cl_sp_fd_out. DATA: lt_key TYPE /scdl/t_sp_k_head. DATA: lt_key_itm TYPE /scdl/t_sp_k_item. DATA: lv_aspect TYPE /scmb/sp_aspect VALUE '/SCDL/S_SP_A_HEAD'. DATA: lv_aspect_itm TYPE /scmb/sp_aspect VALUE '/SCDL/S_SP_A_ITEM'. DATA: lv_rejected TYPE abap_bool. DATA: lt_rRead more

    DATA: lo_spfd TYPE REF TO /scdl/cl_sp_fd_out.

    DATA: lt_key TYPE /scdl/t_sp_k_head.

    DATA: lt_key_itm TYPE /scdl/t_sp_k_item.

    DATA: lv_aspect TYPE /scmb/sp_aspect VALUE ‘/SCDL/S_SP_A_HEAD’.

    DATA: lv_aspect_itm TYPE /scmb/sp_aspect VALUE ‘/SCDL/S_SP_A_ITEM’.

    DATA: lv_rejected TYPE abap_bool.

    DATA: lt_ret TYPE /scdl/t_sp_return_code.

    DATA: lt_return TYPE bapiret2_t.

    DATA: lv_msg TYPE msgtx.

    DATA: lt_outrec TYPE /scdl/t_sp_a_head.

    DATA: lt_outrec_itm TYPE /scdl/t_sp_a_item.

    DATA: lt_docid TYPE /scwm/dlv_docid_item_tab.

    DATA: lt_key_docid TYPE /scdl/t_sp_k_head.

    DATA: lo_sp TYPE REF TO /scdl/cl_sp_prd_out.

    DATA: lo_dlv TYPE REF TO /scwm/cl_dlv_management_prd.

    DATA: lt_sp_k_head TYPE /scdl/t_sp_k_head.

    DATA: lt_sp_k_item TYPE /scdl/t_sp_k_item.

    DATA: lt_a_head_eew TYPE /scdl/t_sp_a_head_eew_prd.

    *–Append messaage for queue start

    MESSAGE s171 INTO lv_msg.

    PERFORM add_message TABLES lt_return

    USING lv_msg.

    CREATE OBJECT lo_spfd.

    *–Get OD

    SELECT docid,

    itemid

    FROM /scdl/db_dlvi_o

    INTO TABLE @lt_key_itm

    FOR ALL ENTRIES IN @it_docid

    WHERE refdocid = @it_docid-docid.

    IF sy-subrc = 0.

    lt_key = CORRESPONDING #( lt_key_itm MAPPING

    docid = docid ).

    *–Fetch corresponding FDO Details

    SELECT docid,

    itemid,

    doccat

    INTO TABLE @lt_docid

    FROM /scdl/db_dlvi_o

    FOR ALL ENTRIES IN @it_docid

    WHERE refdocid = @it_docid-docid.

    IF lt_docid[] IS NOT INITIAL.

    lt_key_docid = CORRESPONDING #( lt_docid MAPPING

    docid = docid ).

    ENDIF.

    DO 5 TIMES.

    SELECT *

    INTO TABLE @DATA(lt_msl)

    FROM /scwm/messagelog

    FOR ALL ENTRIES IN @lt_key

    WHERE docid EQ @lt_key-docid

    AND doccat = ‘FDO’.

    IF sy-subrc EQ 0 AND lt_msl IS NOT INITIAL.

    READ TABLE lt_msl INTO DATA(ls_msl)

    WITH KEY message = /scwm/if_mapping_constants=>sc_m_obdlv_change_revgi.

    IF sy-subrc NE 0.

    WAIT UP TO 2 SECONDS.

    CONTINUE.

    ELSE.

    LOOP AT lt_msl ASSIGNING FIELD-SYMBOL().

    IF -message = /scwm/if_mapping_constants=>sc_m_obdlv_change_revgi.
    -status = ‘X’.

    ELSEIF -message = /scwm/if_mapping_constants=>sc_m_obdlv_confirm_dec.
    -status = ‘X’.

    ENDIF.

    ENDLOOP.

    MODIFY /scwm/messagelog FROM TABLE lt_msl.

    COMMIT WORK AND WAIT.

    MESSAGE s167 INTO lv_msg.

    PERFORM add_message TABLES lt_return

    USING lv_msg.

    ENDIF.

    ENDIF.

    ENDDO.

    *–Check for errors

    IF VALUE #( lt_return[ type = ‘E’ ]-type OPTIONAL ) NE ‘E’.

    *–create service provider

    DATA(lo_message_box) = NEW /scdl/cl_sp_message_box( ).

    *–Create object to instantiate

    CREATE OBJECT lo_sp

    EXPORTING

    io_message_box = lo_message_box

    iv_doccat = /scdl/if_dl_doc_c=>sc_doccat_out_fd “sc_doccat_out_prd

    iv_mode = /scdl/cl_sp=>sc_mode_classic.

    *–Get real warehouse

    /scwm/cl_tm=>set_lgnum( iv_lgnum ).

    *–Lock dlv

    lo_sp->lock(

    EXPORTING

    inkeys = lt_key

    aspect = /scdl/if_sp_c=>sc_asp_head

    lockmode = /scdl/if_sp1_locking=>sc_exclusive_lock

    IMPORTING

    rejected = lv_rejected

    return_codes = DATA(lt_return_codes) ).

    *–read item details into buffer

    lo_sp->select(

    EXPORTING

    inkeys = lt_key_itm

    aspect = /scdl/if_sp_c=>sc_asp_item

    IMPORTING

    outrecords = lt_outrec_itm

    rejected = lv_rejected

    return_codes = lt_ret ).

    *–read header details into buffer

    lo_sp->select(

    EXPORTING

    inkeys = lt_key

    aspect = /scdl/if_sp_c=>sc_asp_head

    IMPORTING

    outrecords = lt_outrec

    rejected = lv_rejected

    return_codes = lt_ret ).

    *–Delete the FDO

    lo_sp->delete(

    EXPORTING

    inkeys = lt_key

    aspect = /scdl/if_sp_c=>sc_asp_head

    IMPORTING

    rejected = lv_rejected

    return_codes = lt_ret

    ).

    *–Check if any error occurred

    IF line_exists( lt_return_codes[ failed = abap_true ] ) OR lv_rejected EQ abap_true.

    *–Error to fail queue

    ELSE.

    lo_sp->save(

    IMPORTING

    rejected = lv_rejected ).

    *–Commit / rollback based on errors

    IF lv_rejected IS INITIAL.

    CALL FUNCTION ‘BAPI_TRANSACTION_COMMIT’

    EXPORTING

    wait = abap_true.

    CALL METHOD lo_sp->(‘CLEANUP’)

    EXPORTING

    reason = /scmb/if_sp_transaction=>sc_cleanup_commit.

    *–Clear buffers and release locks

    /scwm/cl_tm=>cleanup( ).

    ELSE.

    CALL FUNCTION ‘BAPI_TRANSACTION_ROLLBACK’.

    *–Clear buffers and release locks

    /scwm/cl_tm=>cleanup( ).

    ENDIF.

    ENDIF.

    See less
  8. I think this is not how PARAMETER ID is intended to be used. For transfering values from and to memory you should use MEMORY ID (EXPORT TO or IMPORT FROM).

    I think this is not how PARAMETER ID is intended to be used. For transfering values from and to memory you should use MEMORY ID (EXPORT TO or IMPORT FROM).

    See less

Recent Posts on sapewmhelp.com

SAP EWM Help Latest Articles

Create TU in SAP Extended Warehouse Management – EWM

TRY.          lo_tu_cntrl->create_new_bo_tu( EXPORTING is_bo_tu_new = ls_new_tu_head                                         IMPORTING eo_bo_tu     = eo_bo_tu ). IF eo_bo_tu IS BOUND.             es_tu_act_num = eo_bo_tu->get_num( ).             APPEND es_tu_act_num TO lt_inkeys.          ENDIF.             lo_tu_cntrl->save( ). *--Commit work             COMMIT WORK AND WAIT.             tu_num = es_tu_act_num-tu_num.             "Log something in case of success           CATCH /scwm/cx_sr_error INTO lo_tu_exception.             ROLLBACK WORK. *--Log something in case of error

How can you extract specific fields from an internal table using FOR … WHERE inside a VALUE expression?

This creates a new string table containing only the names of users whose status = ‘ACTIVE’—short, clean, and readable. — REDUCE Example —Total Amount: 500 Output: — FILTER Example —Alice ACTIVECharlie ACTIVE — FOR Expression Example —AliceCharlie

Explore Our Blog