SAP for Utilities Discussions
Connect with fellow SAP users to share best practices, troubleshoot challenges, and collaborate on building a sustainable energy future. Join the discussion.
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Error in reading table V_EGER in tcode EG34

0 Kudos

Hello Experts,

While doing a bill related installation using tcode EG34 for a Device I am getting an error message as below:

_______

Error in reading table V_EGER

Message no. E9014

Diagnosis

An error occurred during reading of one or more table entries. This error was reported by the database system.

System Response

The system does not permit the reading of one or more table entries.

It is possible that an SAP short dump has been written from the SAP basis system.

Procedure

Find out if the SAP short dump provides additional information.

You can view SAP short dumps using Transaction SM21.

------------------

Data is perfectly fine. Device is technically installed on the installation already. And Bill-related installed on the same installation till 29/12/2015 and I am trying with Activity date in EG34 as 30/12/2015. Also, there is no Runtime error in system.

Please advise.

Thanks,

Twinkle

9 REPLIES 9

TammyPowlas
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Have you searched the SAP Support notes?  Go to SAP Note & Knowledge Base Article Search | SAP Support Portal and search for this error. 

I searched and 117 notes returned...it would be better if you did this as you know what version your system is on

0 Kudos

Hi Tammy,

Thanks for you reply. I checked the notes none of them seems related. However, there is one note which includes this error message but it is for tcode EL31, also its Reasons and Pre-requisites are not relevant in my case.

Thanks,

Twinkle

0 Kudos

Hi,

After you encounter the error, execute tcode SU53 to see if there are any Security violations.

Perhaps it's a Security violation issue.

I hope this helps.

Regards,

Ivor

0 Kudos

Hi Ivor,

Thanks for the reply. Nope even SU53 does not contain any security error.

Thanks,

Twinkle

srinivasankh
Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi Twinkle,

Can you also please check for any customer-exits for EG34? My suggestion is to debug...

Thanks,

Srini

0 Kudos

Hi Srinivasan,

Thanks for the reply. No there are not user exits in our system for this tcode.

Thanks,

Twinkle

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Twinkle,

I am wondering if you might have resolve the query by now, anyways I just want to check, according to the query asked you have a billing related installation till 29/12/2015, then you might have reversed it related to billing? on 30.12.2015 is this right?

Is this what you did? can you please let what is the sequence of action carried out, such that I can let you know the reason for such error.

FYI, V_EGER is the "View", which gives the information of the Device with Device category, Register group

Hope you will help me to understand the concern

Thanks,

Mohammad.Q

0 Kudos

Hi Mohammad,

Thanks for your reply. No, the query has not been resolved yet. We have raised an OSS to SAP for this.

The Sequence of Steps was:

1. Full Removal of Device with Activity Date 12/30/2015.

2. Reverse Technical Removal of Device

3. Try Bill-install of Device with activity date as 12/30/2015. This is when we are getting the error.

Thanks,

Twinkle

0 Kudos

Hi Twinkle,

I did in the same sequence which you have mentioned and I am afraid to say that I have not received such error in my sandbox and Development system

Below are the steps which I performed:-

1- Full Removal using EG32 (passing activity date as 30.12.2015) and the time slice is created in EGERH and EASTL for that particular logical device number for the BIS date of 29.12.2015)

2- I used the functionality to reverse the technical removal using EG53 (here I have passed only the device number (SERNR field from EQUI table)

3- Then, I used the T-code to install related to billing using EG34 (here I have passed the Installation number, Activity date as 30.12.2015 and Device number)

Hope this is what you did and raised the OSS on the back of it

Thanks,

Mohammad.Q