SAP S/4HANA System Conversion – Working with custom code
The intent of this blog is to share challenges faced during evaluation of custom code conversion from SAP ERP to S/4HANA and how to overcome the same.
It was my first attempt and the very step I took was to get in touch with people around me who have passed this phase to understand the basic procedure. To my surprise, I could not find many such examples and hence thought of sharing my experience via this blog post.
After some initial discussions and research, I came across a blog from Olga(link here) which explained in detail steps to setup remote ATC for carrying such analysis. I thought life is easy and now everything can be done as per mentioned guidelines. But little did I knew that the struggle will start after I performed all the mentioned steps and still could not successfully carry out ATC.
What was the issue?
- After completing the setup for remote analysis , I executed ATC but it did not cover the objects under custom namespace. This is one shortcoming of remote ATC setup as by default it can only work with Y and Z namespaces.
What to do now?
- Register the custom namespaces in checked system(as suggested in the referred blog), but it had its own challenges.
- It was with the system configuration. Registration of custom namespace requires a minimum of NW 7.0 SP 12 and the current system did not meet this requirement.
What can be done now? Are there any alternate tools for analysis?
- Upgrade the existing system to the minimum required SP and proceed.
But upgrade is not always a viable option as customer might not agree and same was the case with us. Then we looked for any alternate analysis tools options.
- Although ATC is the recommended approach, other possible analysis approaches like remote SCI or Custom Code Analyzer can also be used .
But these options also posed the same issues -either with namespace registration or minimum SP requirement
What finally resolved the issue in our case?
As getting the system up-gradation was not an option for us, we went ahead with a different approach. With the help of AOF team, we moved our evaluation component to an available S/4 Sandbox system , prepared the system and finally executed ATC. AS the code base was now available in the same box, there was no need for remote ATC and we could successfully move ahead with our evaluation task.
Thus, few things to keep handy before proceeding with system setup are:
- Knowing the minimum system setup required with each of the evaluation tools
- Understanding the existing landscape to decide which approach is best suited for your scenario
- And If nothing works, check for availability and feasibility of a system where you can proceed