Skip to Content

In previous SAP XI or PI releases, it was really hard to search on a specific value within a message payload. I once extended the XI monitor on an ABAP stack to accomplish this. It worked, but took some time and was not a standard solution.

Now, in our SAP PO 7.4 system, it is really easy to accomplish this and it is standard available.

This is just a small blog to walk you through the different steps.

Create a filter

Go to Monitoring Home (http://<host>:<port>/pimon) -> Configuration and Administration tab -> Adapter Engine -> User-Defined Message Search Configuration, and create a new filter.

You can choose freely for which interfaces you want to create a filter. Just make sure to set the filter to active.

blog 1.png

Define search criteria

Create a new search criteria using an XPath expression. Provide a name and a description.

blog 2.png

Use an XPath expression or choose header fields. In case you choose for an XPath expression, do not forget to indicate possible namespace prefixes.

Just to be sure, check how a specific message enters the system and see if namespace prefixes are involved.

blog 3.png

Indexing options

In case you want to use the filter for older messages, make sure you create an index.

blog 4.png

If the index is not set, only messages being processed after the filter creation are taken into account.

Restrictions

Currently, the search term is case-sensitive.  I still need to investigate if this is a bug or a configuration problem.

Usage

Go to the Message Monitor screen -> Database tab -> Advanced (on the right-hand side).

blog 5.png

If you are just on the database tab, looking at all messages, and you click on a message having a search attribute, an extra tab appears on the bottom of the screen:

blog 6.png

To report this post you need to login first.

9 Comments

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

  1. Aarthi Vijayaraghavan

    Nice blog.  What will be the impact on System Performance if we configure the user defined message search for a specific interface?  Any decision making factors on determining the maximum no of user defined search one can configure in the Production server?

    (0) 
  2. Nidhi Srivastava

    Hi Dimitri,

    I tried implementing as stated but I am not getting extra tab(UDS) in message monitoring.

    UDS_Issue.jpg

    Enabled the indexing option as well.

    UDS_Indexing_Option.JPG

    Please suggest, what I am missing.

    Thanks,

    Nidhi

    (0) 
    1. Dimitri Sannen Post author

      As far as I remember, the xpath expression is very sensitive and needs to be correct.

      If I’m not mistaken, you can test this before using the search

      (0) 
      1. Nidhi Srivastava

        I took the xpath by selecting from receiver determination condition in ICO. Copied and pasted it here. Since, this is IDoc not sure if prefix need to be added or not.

        (0) 
        1. Martin Babayan

          There are dozens of online tools where you can test your xpath expression with the actual payload of your message and see if it’s correct or not. Try to use them first.

          (0) 
  3. Nidhi Srivastava

    Hi Dimitri,

    1) For outbound the requirement is like we need the PO Number from the path – E1EDK02_BELNR when the E1EDK02_QUALF=002, so can we handle this anyhow?

    2) For inbound IDoc Number, The IDOC will be posted in ECC system so if we want the details of the IDOC number can we get that? I tried by using the target path but it didn’t worked. Is this not possible?

    Please let me know your inputs.

    Thanks,

    Nidhi Srivastava

    (0) 
    1. Dimitri Sannen Post author

      Hi,

      1. I guess this is feasible.

      2. I guess the IDOC number is assigned on your ECC system. To get that back, I guess you need to work with something like ALEAUD.

      Kind regards,

      Dimitri

      (0) 
  4. Jonathan Ma

    Can you unhide those prefixes you setup? I found defining the prefix and xpath the most confusing part of the search. Hiding those makes this blog a lot less helpful.

    (0) 

Leave a Reply