cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Inconsistent Check in FITE_VC_SERVICE_REQUEST

Lukas_Weigelt
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi folks,

System Info:

NW AS 7.03 ABAP Stack 731 Level 13, ECC 606 (EHP 6) with SAP_HR 604 Level 81 and EA_HR 607 (HR-Renewal 1) Level 32

Problem:

I'd be grateful if anybody of you on a similar or higher (not lower) System like me could test the following scenario within FITE_REQUEST:

1. Fill out the mandatory general data

2. Navigate into the Service Request VC

3. Add any Service in the Popin that has mandatory fields

4. Leave one or more mandatory fields empty

5. Try to navigate forward (accept) --> an error message will appear and tell you to fill the mandatory fields

6. Click on the Roadmap Step for General Data, the system will ask, whether you want to discard your data, say yes

Result: You are now back at the general data screen, the incomplete data from the service request has NOT been discarded, but applied and you have successfully skipped the plausibility checks.

Looking at the coding in SERVICE_RFC_CHECK I am convinced this is a standard error, because the web memory is updated while the plausibility checks run (can only go haywire at this point). I have, tho, not found any fitting correction via SapxSearch and ANST.

It would be sweet if somebody could try to recreate this before I raise a Support message.

Cheers, Lukas

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

Lukas_Weigelt
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

C'mon, nobody? Get your free pinots now!

Former Member
0 Kudos

Cant help, Im on a lower system right now

If I was in your shoes I would debug to find the cause and post an OSS message (its always faster when you point out the lines causing problems).

Good luck^^

Lukas_Weigelt
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Dammit, thanks anyway, Mathieu.

Raising a message is the plan in any case, just wanted to use the thread to verify I'm correct and not alone. I'll send the OSS message now.


Cheers, Lukas


P.S. I always point out the exact bits in the source code that cause the errors and half of the time I already do the corrections myself, proposing to just apply them to the standard. I don't have the feeling this speeds things up, though, to be honest.

Lukas_Weigelt
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

SAP provided a correction which solves the problem after I raised the Support Mesages. Note # 2137266

Cheers, Lukas

Answers (0)