Maintenance Planner Stack Calculation for EA-HR 608 and SAP_APPL 618

[Matt_Fraser]

Hello all,

I'm trying to setup my first maintenance transaction via Maintenance Planner (I have been using the old Maintenance Optimizer for years). I have finally managed to get the current system details, including support pack levels, correct in MP, and now I'm planning for an upgrade of an ECC system, with HR, from 6.04 to 6.08.

When I get to the Select Files step to select stack-dependent files, the tool doesn't seem to show me all of the applicable software components. I see some of them, such as SAP_BASIS 7.50, SAP_AP 7.50, and SAP_HR 6.08. But, I don't see anything for SAP_APPL (which I was expecting to see in 6.18), or for several others. Also, no EA-HR 6.08.

Sure enough, when I click the button to Add HR Packages, I'm offered the SAP_HR 6.08 support packages and the EA-HR 6.04 support packages. I am quite certain the EA-HR is supposed to be version 6.08 as well.

I have worked pretty hard to get the system details correct in the tool before starting the planning transaction, so I'm a bit mystified as to why it only offers me half the required components, or components in wrong versions.

I'm close to writing it off and going back to the dreaded MOpz, but I think I read somewhere that MOpz doesn't support upgrades to EhP8, only as far as EhP7. I haven't verified that yet.

Any advice out there, or pointers for where I might have gone wrong? Or is the tool experiencing some bugs?

Tagging as I believe he may have experienced something similar.

Cheers,

Matt

[Matt_Fraser]

I have been working with SAP Support on this, and this is what we've come up with so far. Because sps1 for EhP8 is part of the base release, it is included in the upgrade DVD and therefore not all components that will be included are shown in the stack file from Maintenance Planner, as there are not yet additional support packs beyond this for most of these components. Ok, I can accept that. So, the upgrade should correctly update both SAP_HR and EA-HR to 608.

There is still a bug in the Add HR Packages feature, however. It should not be offering EA-HR 604 support packs as part of an upgrade to EA-HR 608. As such, currently it does not appear to be possible to include all the HR support packages in a single step with the upgrade.

The base package for EhP8, sps1, includes SAP_HR and EA-HR 608 sp21. This looks to be equivalent to sp93 for SAP_HR/EA-HR 604. So, as long as you aren't already on a higher HRSP level than 93 in the source release, it should be possible to safely upgrade to 608 without including additional HR packages, and then perform a separate support pack update to the latest HR packages after the upgrade is complete. That's a hassle, and not the way the tool is supposed to work, but it will probably be doable.

I'm currently on HRSP 92 in my source release, so I can likely make this work for me.

If a customer was on HRSP 94 or higher, this would not work, as it would result in a downgrade of their HR components during the upgrade, and thus run a very real risk of data loss.

[jer1]

Thank you for a heads up on this!

We are on HRSP 96 in our DEV/QAS/PRD systems, and I have a "toy box" that is on HRSP 98.  I guess I'll stick to playing with EHP7 for now.

[former_member189797]

Hi Matt,

KBA 2310049

is released for same issue/query. SAP_HR bug is still being investigated.

Regards,
Gaurav

[Matt_Fraser]

Thanks, Gaurav. By the way, you used an SAP-internal link for the KBA. The correct link should be http://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/2310049.

Cheers,

Matt

[Matt_Fraser]

Also, yes, I have implemented Note 2186164 (Switch framework software components info not replicated to Maintenance Planner) in Solution Manager, and confirmed further syncs after implementing that Note from the target system into SLD and LMDB, and from LMDB up to the Support Portal, and from there into the Maintenance Planner. All the system data in MP is correct.

[Matt_Fraser]

Confirmed that MOpz, at least in SolMan 7.1 sp12, will only offer up through EhP7, so that's a no-go.