Application Development Discussions
Join the discussions or start your own on all things application development, including tools and APIs, programming models, and keeping your skills sharp.
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Inconsistency in table TSTCA and SE93

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

We have inconsistency between the table TSTCA and value in field OBJCT with value in field OBJCT in transaction SE93.

This regards many transactions.

Is there any repair program that can be used to fix this inconsistency?

Regards,

Jaana

6 REPLIES 6

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Jaana,

Does this relate to obsolete objects? There are also some obsolete values still lurking around in there sometimes.

You should report this to SAP via service.sap.com so that they fix it in the original source system.

Cheers,

Julius

0 Kudos

Hi again,

How do I report this to SAP? I can not find a way to send messages to SAP!

Right now I am checking some MM transactions like MB51, MB59, MB9A, MC40-MC50... These transactions do not have any authorization object in transactin SE93 but there is a object in table TSTCA field OBJCT.

A problem also seems to be that the authorization check is not done against the object in table TSTCA. It is enough to have access to transaction MB51 in a role, any object is not needed to have access to start transaction MB51.

I tryed to add the object that was missing in transaction SE93 and then the authorization check was done against the object at transaction start. When I deleted the object in SE93 the object was deleted also in table TSTCA!

Regards,

Jaana

0 Kudos

>

> Hi Jaana,

>

> Does this relate to obsolete objects? There are also some obsolete values still lurking around in there sometimes.

>

> You should report this to SAP via service.sap.com so that they fix it in the original source system.

>

> Cheers,

> Julius

No, it does not. It applies to all the transaction codes that Jaana mentioned and it is still the case as of ECC 6.0/11- the objects are still valid. There are not notes on that subject, that I could find.

Former Member
0 Kudos

This has now been reported to SAP Help.

Regards,

Jaana

0 Kudos

Jaana,

did you ever get a response from SAP? Are you willing to share?

BG

mylène

0 Kudos

Hi Mylene,

here is the reply from the developer:

quote

the entries in table TSTCA without corresponding flag entry TSTC-CINFO =

04 or 84 are probably caused by former errors in SE93 which do not exist

any longer, as your tests with SE93 adding and removing authorization

objects to and from transactions proved.

However, this has no influence on the correct operation, because all SAP

delivered coding in the kernel and in ABAP first checks the TSTC-CINFO

field and uses the TSTCA entries only if TSTC-CINFO = 04 or 84. Hence

this is not an error, a correction is not required. SE93 works

correctly.

Furthermore, the content of these tables is not regarded as interface

for customers or customer specific programming.

SE16 shows the whole value of the TSTC-CINFO field only when you go into

display mode for one record, the list displays only the first character

of this field.

For your additional information, 80 means a report transaction, 00 a

+regular transaction, 4 means "take TSTCA into account". All values are

listed in SU2X_CONSTANTS.

.....

.....note 668858 which describes a former

error in R3trans which might have caused these obsolete values in

table TSTCA.

.....

unquote

b.rgds,

Bernhard