SAP S/4HANA Migration Cockpit – Direct Transfer – Value mapping (1909)
1. General information about value mappings
Cross and not cross
Mappings work within a project cross-object. This means once you have edited mapping (e.g. for controlling area) for one object it is then already done and available for all other objects within this project.
Mappings do not work cross-project.
Currently (1909) there is no central mapping capabilities across different projects or across the different MC approaches (file, staging, direct transfer). Mappings can be exchanged via download/upload functionality which the approaches offer.
Where can I edit mapping?
Editing single value mapping entries is only possible in the Migration Cockpit (using the Fiori tile) in the section “Mapping tasks”.
In the SAP S/4HANA backend (logon using SAP GUI) you can enter the modelling environment – use transaction LTMOM.
In the folder of your migration objects (e.g. S4_CO_Activity_Type) you find a folder rules. Here, you can download and upload mapping for single objects or for all objects within this project.
There are different download possibilities:
- As XML or as ZIP
- Only the empty mapping template, documentation and signature
- Template plus value mappings:
- All mappings
- Only mappings which have been created automatically. This happens when you select data from the source system. The Migration Cockpit automatically creates mapping values 1:1 for each predefined mapping task, e.g. source value: KOSTL1, target value: KOSTL1.
- Only mapping which have been created or changed manually by a user.
- As soon as there are mapping values available the arrow gets a green bar in LTMOM (as shown in the screenshot above).
There are different upload possibilities:
- Replace all old mapping entries or let existing mapping values stay unchanged and upload only the new entries
- Set the uploaded entries automatically to status “confirmed” or keep them in status “to be confirmed”
In this place you can’t see the mapping values!
If you go to the folder rules which is on the same level as Migration Objects and you click on value mappings, you see all value mappings delivered for the respective scenario (e.g. migrating from an ERP source system).
If you click e.g. on rule MAP_LSTAR you see the mapping values for Activity Type mapping.
In LTMOM you can view single entries – but it is not possible to change single values in this place. This is because of technical reasons (LTMOM locking logic, update logic).
There are discussions to integrate the whole mapping topic including download/upload functionality in the Migration Cockpit (Fiori) in the future. Mapping is a run time topic (not a design time topic). So it would better fit in the Migration Cockpit which is the run time environment.
When can I edit mapping?
Once at least one instance of a migration object is migrated it is not possible any more in LTMOM to upload mappings for this object in order to avoid severe inconsistencies/damages.
There are discussions to offer more differentiated possibilities regarding the upload in the future.
Editing single value mappings in the Migration Cockpit (in Fiori) is possible at all times.
With 1909 there is no tracking or locking concept for mappings implemented. This topic is under discussion.
2. How can I create own value mappings (1909)?
You create value mappings using transaction LTMOM (Migration Object Modeler). Open your project, position the cursor on “rules”, right mouse-click: “create value mapping”.
Assign the value mapping to the field where you want to use it.
The automatic creation of value mapping proposals (1:1) is not yet realized for custom-own value mappings (in 1909), so some additional manual steps are necessary.
Before starting the selection in the Migration Cockpit (Fiori) from the source system, the Z value mapping must be created and uploaded manually.
- Download the “old” values from the source system for example into an excel.
- Create the mapping 1:1 (source value : target value).
- Upload it in LTMOM.
- In the MC you see now the mapping task marked as „done”.
Selection and following activities can now be processed as usual in the Migration Cockpit.
For more information about SAP Data Management and Landscape Transformation (DMLT) see this page https://www.sap.com/services/implementation/data-mgmt-landscape-transformation.html or read the solution brief and the SAPPI Success Story. You can contact the global SAP DMLT team by email firstname.lastname@example.org. They provides services for Selective Data Transition, New Implementation and System Conversion that can also be delivered remotely.
My company will embrace S/4 Hana in the near future from Sap R/3, and now we have S/4 Hana sanbox system, but unfortunately, I can't use direct transfer in migration cockpit due to some kind of reason, so here I would like to check with you, for mapping rule in the method direct transfer, is it possible to use so-called 'field-based mapping rule"(see attached picture) like in the method "migration from file/staging table", to write some customized code to fulfill some special requirement?
example of field-based mapping rule
If no, do you have any plan to implement this "field-based mapping rule" in direct transfer method?
Thanks a lot and wish you had a nice weekend.
Hello Zhanxiang Qi(Seven),
in 1909 it is not yet possible to use custom coding transformation rules in the Direct Transfer approach. Custom coding rules will be possible starting with release 2020 (release to customer: 07 October 2020).
Got it, thanks a lot for your information.
Zhanxiang Qi (Seven)
Are there any tables, in which all the value mappings can be seen for a project?
in transaction LTMOM you can see all mapping tasks with their values. You can download them all at once if you want.
Here you see all mapping tasks for the project => download button
Here you see the detail screen for one mapping task (MAP_KOKRS_KOSTL) with its values.
Is this what you are looking for?
thanks for your informative blog, could you help as per attached i can't find button you showed above to export rules
thanks in advance
thanks for the positive feedback!
With release 2020, the download and upload of mapping values has been moved to the Migration Cockpit Fiori App, mapping task screen, so it is not available in transaction LTMOM any more.
You see the functionality in the App in the screenshot below.
Maybe the full MC slide deck is also interesting => LINK.
Thanks Heike for investing time to reply
but I'm using 1709, or i miss something
oh, sorry. Then you are not talking about the option Direct Transfer (which is available since 1909) but about the File/Staging approach. Unfortunately, I am not the expert for that, I will ask a colleague to have a look at your question.
for the file/staging approach, you will find the mapping values in LTMOM in the section "translation object". If you open the section you will get the conversion table on the right-hand side. There you can choose "download" and if you are in edit mode also "upload".
The conversion table supports a maximum of 1000 entries. If this limit is reached, the system displays a notification message instead of the conversion entries. You can use the SAP S/4HANA Migration Cockpit to specify more than 1000 entries. In the SAP S/4HANA Migration Cockpit, navigate to the relevant project and choose the option Confirm Mapping Values.
LTMOM Screen 1709
You can also upload/download mapping values in LTMC choosing the settings section and the respective mapping task.
LTMC Screen 1709
Best regards, Kirstin
thank you for your help, appreciated
Hi Heike Jensen
Do you know the tables which we can see in se16n for value mappings from convert step in migration cockpit for any appraoch for fields?
Currently we want to setup the direct transfer between ECC and S4, but there is always an error during the preparation step, see the error below. Because there is a function module not existed in the ECC.
Is this because there is no template project available for ECC and S4? I copied the template project for S4 to S4?
the direct transfer between S4 and S4 was tested successfully.
Could you please guide me to solve this issue? thanks a lot!
Hello Chen Jun,
the Direct Transfer is NOT designed to transfer data from S4 to S4. You will not get any support by SAP for this use case.
I would assume that you did not implement the DMIS-Add-on in the ERP source system.
Pls. check the standard MC PPT, slide 32. On this slide, technical preconditions for Direct Transfer and system preparations are listed. You also find the link to the relevant implementation guide & the central SAP note.
I hope this information helps.
Thanks very much for your reply. thanks for your remind, the test for S4 to S4 is just to verify why the transfer from ECC to S4 doesn't work.
actually we install the DMIS-Add in the ERP source system(see the version below).
DMIS 2011_1_731 0017 SAPK-11617INDMIS DMIS 2011_1
and I reviewed the documentation which you provide, follow the instruction from notes 2747566 and 2836748, but it still doesn't work. The system call a function module from Source ERP system, but the function module belongs to S4, I tried to implement the notes 2819257 in Source ERP system, but the system remind me the package CNV_OT_APPL_PE_S4 is not not existed.
Could you please advice how I can solve this issue? thanks a lot.
Hello Chen Jun,
note 2819445 contains all corrections regarding MC basis/direct transfer.
Pls. check if all listed notes are implemented. If the issue still persists, pls. open a ticket on CA-LT-MC.
this has not quite much to do with value mappings but I did not find the right spot to ask.
Is is possible to export a project with the direct transfer approach? For example export in dev system and import to q-system or prod-system?
in the 1909 release, unfortunately there is no export/import or transport function available for the direct transfer approach. This means, you really have to create the project again in Quality and Prod.
As we get this question quite often, I guess we will soon have an official SAP note which states it.
With the 2020 release (which will be released to customer on 7 Oct), projects and objects can be transported via the normal SAP transport concept.
In the Migration Cockpit, you will then assign the project to a transport. In transaction LTMOM you can also then add single objects or rules. Mapping values always have to be down & uploaded (in 2020 in the Migration Cockpit or in LTMOM).
we also urgently need the export / import function for direct transfer. We currently have 1909FSP01. Can you say when there will be an advance correction?
as you also opened a ticket, I provided the answer in your ticket
Thanks for your blog Heike Jensen
I have a question about the mapping, with LTMOM, we can upload a mapping for a maximum of 1000 entries, otherwise we need to use LTMC.
In LTMOM, the format is similar of the mapping, but in LTMC is totally different.
How can we find the mapping to use with the values for fields : TROBJ_GUID; GUID; DELIVER; STATE; ICON;
Other question, this mapping will map customer from my legacy system to BP in S4, do we have to add a filler for BP number or do we have to provide value without filler ?
Thanks for your return
as you mention transaction LTMC, I would guess you do not talk about Direct Transfer but about the file/staging approach, right?
If this is the case, this is the wrong blog 🙂
However, pls. submit your question to: email@example.com
Hello Heike Jensen
Yes, I'm speaking the case using file/staging approach.
The legacy system is another software, we are not doing a direct transfer between both systems.
When I use LTMOM to upload the mapping, the file structure is as:
When I use the LTMC, the file structure is:
This structure from LTMC transaction is abstruse. Another point, if we have some error on the file (ie, error on mapping) there is no error message, but nothing happens.
Another question, and it's not clear, in this case, I translate customer account to BP, do we have to fill the value with a filler of 0 in right?
I have a last question on mapping, in case a source value has no target, ie payment method, we can't do mapping with a source to a target = <Null>. How can we do without adding free code ?
as this is a blog about MC Direct Transfer, pls. post your question to one or both other channels:
Thanks for your understanding.
I'm looking for also all codifications used on LTMOM transactions. Ie on Rules, we have:
BOL ... Before output line?
And also the codification to use to perform form or translation ... where can I find it ?
Pls. see above
Thanks for the great blogs on the Direct Transfer approach. I wanted to let you know I referenced your blogs in one I just wrote summarizing my experiences with the tool. Hope that is okay with you!
Hi Heike Jensen
Could you please support me with migration of materials in Direct Transfer 1909?
I have migrated materials from Source system where they have data in Purchasing, MRP and Accounting views at plant level. Unfortunately in the Target system only Accounting view has been created.
CVT Code for Views
I have performed also a simulation with the same BAPI - BAPI_MATERIAL_SAVEREPLICA via transaction SE37 and a material has been created correctly with mentioned views above.
In 1909 it is not possible to modify the CVT rule. Can you advise me, how can I resolve the issue?
Thanks for sharing your knowledge!
Hello Desislava Dimova,
regarding the in scope/out of scope, the migration object documentation should give all the information needed. You see here the information I have copied from an 1909 system. The information is not clustered in views but according to type of data which is migrated.
Regarding your second question (the CVT rule), pls. be so kind and open a ticket on component CA-DT-MIG-S4.
Hi Heike Jensen
I have submitted a ticket and the issue has been resolved.
Dear Heike Jensen,
After Migration of Material Master in Migration Cockpit 1909, I found that the selection criteria ignores deleted material at the plant level MARC only if the material is assigned only to one plant and did not migrate it. In case the material is assigned to multiple plants, the selection to ignore the deleted material on MARC level does not work and Direct Transfer has been migrated the material with deletion flag.
Migrated material in MARC view
Аs a selection criteria I have set:
LVORM: = "blank" - to ignore deleted materials
LVORM: = "blank" - to ignore deleted materials
Could you please advise me, if this issue is related to the information that out of scope is materials marked for deletion?
Information in Object Material/ Out of Scope
Thanks for your support!
in direct transfer 2020, can we also have the same functionality as file/staging approach that we can handle the result after the function module called? in file/staging there is an include for Handling the Result Parameter.
we want to fill our customized mapping table after the data object created, ideally can we use the 2nd transfer step where we can call a function module to update the mapping table?
Hello Chen Jun,
I have created a video which is called "How to create an own mapping rule" (for release 2020). Pls. see this link.
Starting at time 18:15, I explain the parameters in transaction LTMOM (modelling environment) which have to be maintained in order to get back the created mapping value. This might be especially interesting in case of internal numbering or for multi-step migration objects such as e.g. fixed asset.
I hope this answers your question?
Thanks very much for your feedback, your solution is very good but unfortunately this only works with the value mapping, we have to run a lot of projects in few years to transfer the data from legacy ERP systems to S4. Value mapping is project based mapping strategy, we want to have one central mapping table for specific field, e.g. material number, during this transition period, other applications can also access those mapping tables.
will we consider such requirement? Thanks.
Dear Chen Jun,
currently, there are no plans to provide a general, cross-project mapping storage.
OK, thanks for the feedback.
Dear Chen Jun,
I would have a question regarding this topic. Assume, you create a central table to hold the values in a central manner and SAP provides an API which is able to extract and fill the SAP mapping tables of the Direct Transfer. Would this help?
Thanks for asking, I think this will help a lot. Just one additional requirement, when we extract the mapping data from value mapping, can we only extract the entries that the data is migrated, since the mapping tasks are confirmed before the data is migrated, often we have the entries are not migrated so far.
Hello Chen Jun,
do you mean: regarding this API, it should also be able to extract only the target mapping values for which the migration has already taken place successfully?
yes, since the entries in mapping table should reflect the actual migration result, other applications can access the correct mapping result. I hope this is OK?
Hello Chen Jun,
thanks for clarifying the requirement.
Currently, there is no such functionality available. The target mapping entries only reflect which entries have been created while selecting the source data sets (old value = new value as proposal value) respectively the values which have been edited manually or uploaded by the customer.
In case of internal numbering, the target mapping values are written back into the mapping after the internal number has been fetched from the target system number range and used to create the data record in the target system.
Thanks for your feedback, for complex mapping relationship or the mapping will be used in a later stage, we will build up our own mapping table.
I have another question. Now we start the first test in quality system, after we transport the project to quality system. We are aware that we can't change any filters in the selection of source tables in LTMOM. that means we also need to set all the filters in development system, then transport to quality system and later productive system.
Is this designed like that or just because we can't edit the project in quality system?
Hello Chen Jun,
yes, the design works like this. Pls. see the picture below. I am currently working on a slide deck around the transport topic in MC DT. It will still take some time until it will we published :-), but you will then find it in the MC landing page LINK.
Thanks for your quick feedback.
from the slides, I can understand the selection for company code is transported, but not all the filters.
do you think this is reasonable that all the filters need to be transported? The tests in development and quality systems as well as final productive migration scope normally are different, at least it would be good if we can change the filters so that we can influence the test scope?
I also found there is another transaction code CNV_PE_PROJ, in the transaction code we can change the filters in quality system, do you see risks if we do so?
Hello Chen Jun,
the transaction you mentioned is NOT RELEASED to customers!!
With SAP S/4HANA 2020 we introduced the transport function to distribute MC projects across the system landscape. Furthermore, we decided to allow the MC project configuration in modifiable environments such as e.g. development systems only. This includes the project creation, adding a migration object (MO) to a project and all configurations in the migration object modeler (LTMOM). I see that some more flexibility might be needed in some rare cases, on the other hand, you have the requirement of minimizing the risk in a productive run - thus only tested customizing shall be used.
I guess if you talk about "filters", you mean the restrictions on table field level, right? Because filters are basically used in the sense of means to delimitate and derive organizational units as e.g. company codes, controlling areas and so on - pls. see slide 31 in this LTMOM slide deck: LINK
With 2020 we introduced the mandatory assignment of a development package during the MC project creation process.
Prerequisites for Modifications
The check if a project/MO is modifiable or not is based on two criteria
Check for client-specific and cross-client object changes
→ Transaction SCC4
Check for general system change options
→ Transaction SE06 (button "System Change Option")
Thanks very much for your detailed explanations.
I understand that all the "development" of the migration projects should be done in Dev system and transported to Qas and Prd systems. this is the advantage if I compare the file/staging approach which can only be exported and imported.
but the "filter"(selection or restrictions on table field) could be different in different systems.
regarding the transaction code CNV_PE_PROJ, this is very powerful and useful though this is not released to us. normally we need to build up complex mapping rules for migration, in this transaction code, I see the possibility that we can define the split/condition rules and so on. we have few use cases which exactly need those features. Compared to file/staging approach, in direct transfer approach, I missed the event-based rule where I can enhance/skip the data entries.
you know in greenfield projects, we can't simply transfer the data entries, normally we need to define complex mapping relationship since the process/data structure are different. not easy as in brownfield projects.
Hello Chen Jun,
you are right, in Direct Transfer there are no event-based rules. The rules which are assigned to a field are always called at one point in time: when you start the simulation, the rules are applied to the field values and the instances containing the transformed values are passed to the API.
There is only one rule which is called at a different point in time: the so-called skip rule. This rule can be applied if instances shall not be passed from the sender system to the Migration Cockpit (available since release 2020). This rule is a coding rule and is maintained in LTMOM, pls. see slide 36 in the above mentioned slide deck.
Best regards & have a nice weekend!
Skip rule is useful for us. but skip rule can't fulfill all the requirements since we can only keep or skip at instance level, in some cases we need to decide if we keep or skip the the entries in the second level table based on certain logic.(e.g. schedule lines in schedule agreement)
that means for the loop of each table, we would need a kind of event-based rule to influence the transformed values to the API. this is already already available in file/staging approach.
Thanks and wish you have a nice weekend too!
Hello Chen Jun,
yes, the requirement you describe above can currently not be covered with the approach Direct Transfer.
one additional question: can we use the manual defined table?
I can create the table, but how can I create the include? I learned from the documentation that the include should exist in source system as well. can I simply create the same include in source and target systems manually?
Hello Chen Jun,
yes, it is sufficient to create the include in the source system. It is not necessary to create it in the target system.
Thanks for all your professional answers!
Wish you have a nice holiday!
Stay safe and healthy!!
Is it possible to use the new internal number range while creating the materials in S/4HANA using direct transfer? or can materials be only created with the same material numbers which exist in ECC? The same thing I would like to also ask for customer and suppliers.
Hello Lalit Kumar Sharma,
for Migration Cockpit, Direct Transfer, releases 1909 and 2020, only external numbering is available for material (1909) respectively product (2020) => pls. compare migration object documentation on help.sap.co, direct link.
Regarding customers / vendors / business partners, we have very detailed info material on our Landing page. It explains all possible variants regarding internal/external numbering.
=> section training, training material, Direct Transfer
Pls. find here the direct link to the respective PDF (name: CVI integration).
Thanks for your reply and confirmation regarding material number range.
Regarding customers, I have already looked into this direct transfer CVI document and tried to test the 1st scenario by configuring the internal numbering for both BP grouping and customer account group but I get an error saying "No target value specified for Customer 0000010031;specify target value to proceed". Not sure if there is an error in product 2020 or I'm missing something while transferring the data? Just for your info, I have kept the 'Blank' value in the value mapping step for customer number.
Moreover I would also like to clarify if I use the internal numbering for both BP grouping and customer account group, can I still create the BP and customer with the same number? The CVI document say that "The business partner number need not be same as the customer/vendor number, they are generated". In our case we are planning to keep the same number for BP and customer using the new internal number range all together, so would like to check if we are allowed to do that via direct transfer?
Hello Lalit Sharma,
I would suggest that you go in detail through the migration object documentation of the concerned objects: LINK. Pls. make sure that you use the correct release (in the upper part) & the right approach (Direct transfer SAP ERP). If there are no hints regarding the issues, pls. open a ticket on component: CA-LT-MC.
Thanks for your reply. I have checked the documentation but there is no hint regarding this issue. We will raise this to SAP if needed.
We are trying to migrate data from ECC to S4 through direct transfer. Until now we have successfully transferred the predessor to the Customer migration object. However, when we try to migrate Customers we experience an error that we cannot solve on our own.
When we simulate the instance the result is successful. However, when we try to migrate the instance we receive the errors shown in the screenshot below:
Additional question. We have followed the SAP S/4HANA Cookbook - Customer/Vendor Integration. Nevertheless, I cannot find any information about the order of importing the migration cockpit for customers, vendors, and business partners when BP is active in the source system, but the BPs are not correlated to the customers and vendors you want to migrate.
my name is Heike, not Heiki
The cookbook you mention is not Migration Cockpit specific but a general SAP document so-to-say.
Regarding MC Direct Transfer, pls. refer to this document: LINK. It describes in detail all the possible scenarios as well as CVI objects and their sequence.
You find a lot of detailed material (also regarding the modeler) regarding MC DT on our so-called landing page: LINK
Did you make enhancements to the SAP migration object? If not, are you sure that you have the current content in your system? Pls. refer for more information to this slide:
If this does not solve the issue, pls. open a ticket under CA-LT-MC. Pls. also mention your release.
Is the "source code" under transformation rules in LTMOM are supported in S/4HANA on Premise 2020? My requirement is to adapt the value mapping of material numbers (based on my own source code) for migration object BOM. If source code is supported in 2020, then do you have any documentation describing the procedure in detail?
Hello Lalit Sharma,
in this slide deck, you find deep dive material about LTMOM functionality. Also on how to create a source code rule. Own source code rules are supported since onprem 2020.
Deep dive Direct Transfer LTMOM => get real deep insights on how to use the modelling environment
Thanks for the info. Will check this documentation!
I come back again to you. Do we have some best practice for improving data selection performance, as some of the migration object includes a lot of tables(e.g. routing), the performance is very poor, how we can improve? e.g. filter on sub tables? disconnect not used tables?
Thanks a lot.
Hello Chen Jun,
we have just released a KBA which collects all possibilities regarding performance in Migration Cockpit Direct Transfer: LINK.
Yes, some objects are really complex by nature. The objects delivered by SAP must cover all possible scenarios which might exist at a customer. This means SAP cannot exclude tables which might not be filled in a dedicated (your) customer case. So if you want to change the selection, this lies in your responsibility.
Thanks a lot for the update. It looks really helpful!!
One additional question regarding the selection dependency, this creates trouble for us.
e.g. selection dependency between material and BOM
normally we will migrate all relevant materials, select several times in order to complete it.
with this selection dependency, we need to select materials based on the material scope from BOM, then we can select the BOMs, this links too close that we lose the flexibility for migration.
can we disconnect this selection dependency? Thanks.
another question regarding the limitation of entries in filters, as we are aware that we can only enter max 999 entries in the filter for one source table, often we need to include the material number in the filter, but this is not sufficient, can we remove this limitation? Thanks.
Hello Chen Jun,
there is a workaround, using a Z table. I cannot just post it here. I'll provide the note or KBA number once it is ready.
Best regards, Heike
OK, thanks. Currently we created Z* table and filtered with skip rule as the workaround.
I hope you are doing well.
today I found there is new note 3092921 - Migration Cockpit – Direct Transfer, BAdI for Selection to apply additional logic for data selection, Migrate your Data app,
I assume this is the workaround for the limitation of data selection, right?
currently our S4 version is 2020FPS01, I can't see the possibility to activate the BADI, so which version we should use? Thanks a lot.
Hello Chen Jun,
thanks good, I hope your are doing well, too.
We missed to mention that this KBA 3092921 - Migration Cockpit – Direct Transfer, BAdI for Selection is only valid starting with release 2021 (which is to come in October). We will add this information. This new BAdI is the possibility to define selection (selection of keys) by using ABAP means. With the release of the 2021 release, we will also publish material about this new function in the development news and in our LTMOM deep dive material.
The issue you refer to, more than 999 entries in the selection on table level => we will soon (next week?) release another KBA which describes the workaround for that topic.
Thanks a lot for your feedback.
Now I received the note
KBA 3094476 - SAP S/4HANA Migration Cockpit: Transfer data directly from SAP system, Error: ‘Too many records of technical expressions are entered for table XXX’ due to restriction for more than 999 entries
Hello Chen Jun,
yes, this is the right one!
Have a nice day!
thanks for this very interesting blog. I was wondering how to map any value to initial when there is a value list behind the field?
E.g. the legacy system has a field called "serial numer required". Possible values are "Y" and "N" for yes and no. When "Y", we want to map to a default serial number profile. If "N" we want to keep the field empty. In the value mapping I have to put a value. I can't confirm an empty field even that is what I need. In LSMW I could also confirm (tick the box) when the value was empty. Is there some escape character representing empty? I didn't find any informaiton but I think the solution should be to change the code of the mapping...this should just be possible by confirming an empty field or by putting something like <initial>, <emtpy>, '' whatever.
thanks for the positive feedback :-).
Pls. find detailed information on how to use the modeling environment in this slide deck: SAP S/4HANA Migration Cockpit - Deep Dive LTMOM for Direct Transfer
Slides 38 ff are about transformation rules.
I attach here a screenshot which shows the part "field mapping - initialize field". Maybe your case is more complex and you might rather go for a source code rule (available with release 2020) => see slide deck.
again me:), one topic I would like to ask your support.
During our test migration, we identified for material BOM migration the standard migration object doesn’t support the scenario “BOM item deleted without change number”.
This scenario happened when the user created a BOM item afterwards deleted the item before release.
From our point of view, this is a “normal” situation that the user might make a mistake or after review the item is not necessary before release. And the deletion can be done without a change number.
We raised a ticket "Incident: 644492 / 2021 - Material BOM migration error" to SAP, but the support team doesn't want to support this scenario, could you please check if this can be supported, as this is very important for us and I believe this happens in other companies as well. if we would need to enhance by ourselves, it will take much efforts to enhance the standard API. thanks a lot.
Did you get a solution for this? We're having the same issues and couldn't find a solution.
finally we made a modification with the standard API to support this case, but still have some issues, after we fixed the issues, I can share some details how we modified.
Hi Chen, thank you for your fast reply!
I've also did some changes to the API yesterday and was able to bypass the error, but if the BOM has predecessor nodes, it doesn't seem to work properly, regardless if we provided translations for all the relevant fields like IDENTIFIER, STVKN, VGKNT etc.
I conclude that this error is part of standard SAP behavior and with good reason the support team does not offer support. I strongly think that data cleansing should be done before, if migrating such BOMs is needed.
Nevertheless, please share some details what you have modified on your side.
as far as I learned from my colleague who did the actual modification, we need to re-organize the item node and counter in STPO &STAS, because SAP only support the item nodes in a sequence without any break. but deletion without change number causes some item nodes disappeared.
How you want to perform data cleansing? as those are technical fields.
Hi Chen, fast response again - cool! 🙂
That's exactly what I did, I reorganized the item node & counters in STPO & STAS, for all relevant fields, but the results with the migrated BOMs were not satisfactory.
Data cleansing should be done by the owners of the source system, I don't have other info from that side.
Thanks for this very helpful blog, it has helped a lot in migration,
Now I have come across an error message I cannot resolve: Transfer result 000000000030030907 differs from TRule mapping data in field EV_ASNUM
This has come up after uploading mapping values for Material Groups for Service Master.
Thanks in advance
Hello Gyöngyi Meszlényi,
are you using the Direct Transfer approach?
Best would be to search for notes with the message ID (which has a pattern like e.g. KA123).
Another reason could be migration object updates which have come in by feature pack, release upgrade or a TCI note which refers to an object. You could also check this. If there are updates, you would have to either create a new project or add the same object again from template (go to transaction LTMOM, into the project, create object from template).
I hope this helps.
Thanks for the very quick response.
We are using Direct transfer, there was an upgrade last weekend. We are on 2020, I think. So it might indeed be the update, as the project has been created before. I will consult the colleagues more experienced with this tool whether we have to add the object again, or just leave it as is.
The problem might not be a problem, as all records seem to have been migrated, but all entries have returned with this error.
Thanks a lot for your help!
I attach here some new slides on "how object updates work in MC Direct transfer" - they will be soon part of the MC general official slide deck: LINK
As said: you can either create a new project or add again the updated object to the existing project. You can have an object more than one time in your project! To do this, go to transaction
=> LTMOM, go to your project, press: project, create migration object, from template. This adds the object again with the information from the updated template object
And another slide about how to tailor projects - as we see some questions around that topic, too.
Impact of release upgrade
Impact of FPS and TCI notes
How to tailor projects
Hi Heike Jensen
Do you know the tables which can see in se16n for value mappings from convert step in migration cockpit for any appraoch?
after a simulation, mapping is not persisted, so you cannot view it after simulation in SE16N or the like.
In transaction LTMOM, you can use the simulation function which allows you to activate debugging. So here, you can follow the values while mapping rules are applied.
Use the simulation button: