S07 SAPNote 2802208 - Restriction Note for advanced Available-to-Promise (aATP) in SAP S/4HANA 1909 Component: XX-SER-REL (Miscellaneous > Service Messages > Business Suite and SAP S/4HANA Release Information), Version: 21, Released On: 13.09.2023 | Symptom You are using advanced Available-to-promise (aATP) in SAP S/4HANA 1909. This note details restrictions in aATP with SAP S/4HANA 1909. | Other Terms ABC, BOP, PAL, RFDY, ATP, advanced ATP, aATP, availability check, Transportation Management, TM, GRULG | Reason and Prerequisites The advanced Available-to-Promise functions have been activated in the corresponding checking group for the relevant material-plant combination. | Solution Abbreviations used in this note: ABC = Alternative-Based Confirmation (automatic determination of confirmation alternatives from a different shipping plant) BOP = Backorder Processing (mass availability check with sophisticated prioritization capabilities) PAC = Produet Availability Check (standard availability check algorithm for a material-plant combination based on stock, concurrent supply and demand elements defined by the scope of check) PAL = Product Allocation (availability check algorithm based on virtual supply which is available for a given characteristic value combination and time period) With SAP S/4HANA 1909, the following restrictions apply: + General restrictions for Available-to-Promise in SAP S/4HANA: © Check against forecast, + General restrictions in the advanced ATP check: 1. Alternative-Based Confirmations If used, ABC would consider all plants in the sales organization for the requested material. Currently, there is no means to restriet the set of plants to be used. Please consider system performance when there are several plants in the sales organization. Product selection Sales scheduling agreements with call-offs Delivery blocks with shifting confirmation to the future Route scheduling (Routenfahrplan - AULWE) Weight-dependent transportation and shipment scheduling PSP grouping (table GRPGA) and cross-project material (field MARC-KZPSP on MRP3-" SAP Transportation Management based Scheduling Transactions V_V2, V_RA and C006 are not supported anymore 10. Quantity distribution in planned/production orders (Distribution Key) u1, Sales Order processing out of Service Order or Service Notification (Transactions IW31, 1W32 / IW51, IW52) or ‘where ever Sales Order processing is called by ‘Call Dialog’. 12. Enhancement ATP0ooo1 yeugueen13. Supersessions are not supported in aATP + Backorder Processing (BOP) 1, Problem: Requested schedule line displayed incorrectly in the Monitor BOP Run app Prerequisite: The respective sales order line item is categorized for confirmation strategy "Fill” and contains a delivery proposal with multiple confirmed schedule lines. Mitigation: Display the item details to see all confirmed schedule lines and ignore the incorrect aggregation line. 2. Restriction: Short dump during BOP run: TSV_TNEW_PAGE_ALLOC_FAILED or TSV_TNEW_OCCURS_NO_ROLL_MEMORY Prerequisite: The selected number of line items is very large (> 250k line items), Mitigation: Use global filters to reduce the number of selected line items or increase the memory for your batch work processes (1A STo2 or RZ10, parameter abap/heap_area_nondia). When changing the system parameters, please be aware that the number of work processes and the memory per work process need to be balanced out and suit the available hardware Explanation: The volume of data processed in a BOP run is proportional to the number of requirements selected for processing. It must be ensured that the ABAP work processes have sufficient memory available to process these requirements. As a rule of thumb, the memory consumption of a BOP run can be calculated based on the following figures: a straightforward BOP with Product Availability Check only, needs approximately 10-15KB per requested schedule line. If Product Allocation is used, the memory consumption rises to 15-25KB or more. If Alternative- Based Confirmation is activated, each evaluated alternative needs the same memory as a requested schedule line. As ATP is highly configurable and there are many influencing factors, these numbers might vary depending on the overall data volume and the complexity of the business process. 3. Problem: Sub-optimal availability check results for line items where PAC and PAL are active. Prerequisite: The characteristic combination for the PAL. check is not using material and plant as key attributes. In addition, BOP is checking several line items for different material-plant combinations which check against the same PAL time series. Furthermore, one of the material-plant combinations is locked, resulting in the PAC check being unable to create a confirmation, Mitigation: Do not use PAL with key combinations which do not comprise MATNR and WERKS. Furthermore, avoid parallel availability checks for material-plant combinations which are being processed in a BOP run. Explanation: PAC and PAL use differing lock strategies. 4. Problem: Unexpected scheduling results Prerequisite: The affected material has weight groups which are relevant for transportation scheduling Mitigation: Do not use weight groups. :xplanation: Weight-dependent scheduling is not supported in BOP. 5, Problem: Stock transfer requisitions cannot be handled Prerequisite: Stock transfer requisitions compete for the same stocks (or planned receipts) as sales orders. Mitigation: Use stock transport orders as BOP-relevant requirements instead. Explanation: Stock transfer requisitions are not supported for selection in BOP segments. 6. Problem: Scheduling agreements with call-offs and non-delivery relevant document types such as quotations cannot be handled Prerequisite: Scheduling agreements with call-offs and non-delivery relevant document types such as quotations compete for the same stocks (or planned receipts) as the sales orders. Mitigation: For mass availability checks for non-delivery relevant document types such as quotations, use the rescheduling function available in transaction V_V2; therefore do not activate aATP for material-plant combinations which are used for those document types. Explanation: Not implemented (to be addressed in a future SAP S/4HANA release), 7. Problem: No pre-delivered selection attribute available to differentiate between document types when defining BOP segments Prerequisite: You are using Select Option Tool (SOT) to define selection criteria. Mitigation: Define your own characteristic value groups to represent the document types. Explanation: Field ATPRELEVANTDOCUMENTCATEGY is no longer delivered by SAP. 8, Problem: The BOP fallback run cannot be triggered if more than 2000 material-plant combinations failed in the first run. Prerequisite: You are using the Select Option Tool (SOT) to define selection criteria and you are working with the strategies Win or Gain. Mitigation: Adapt the BOP Variant so that fewer requirements are classified in the confirmation strategi Gain. Explanation: The definition of the database procedure cannot exceed 256k characters. Win or+ Release for Delivery 1. Problem: Incorrect processing items identified for Supply Assignment (ARun) Prerequisite: Items to be processed with Supply Assignment (ARun) are not detected by the Release for Delivery app. Mitigation: Avoid items that are to be processed with Supply Assignment (ARun). Explanation: Not implemented (to be addressed in a future SAP S/4HANA release). + Product Allocation (PAL) 1. Problem: A re-check of product allocation for order items with Supply Assignment (Arun) quantities can lead to confirmations lying before the PAL consumption for the assigned quantities. Prerequisite: Supply assignments exist for affected orders. Availability is re-checked for the orders, also against PAL and the allocation check is executed with goods issue date or with requested delivery date. SD scheduling uses calendars with non-working days and allocation consumption period lies directly after a non-working day. Backward scheduling of consumption date leads to a material availability date which lies before the non-working. days. Mitigation: Avoid checking PAL with supply assignments with the above mentioned prerequisites. Explanation: Re-checking order items with a re-scheduling of supply assignment dates can lead to dates not respecting PAL planned quantities. Recommendation: Use PAL with check date time type material availability date in such scenarios. 2. Problem: Sub-optimal quantity consumption of capacity product allocation check for sales BOM. items Prerequisite: A requirement-relevant subitem of a sales BOM (LUMF) is checked within the capacity product allocation check. Explanation: If sales BOM items are checked for product allocation, the check reserves (consumes) allocation quantity for each item. After all checks have been performed, the delivery group correlation for all sales BOM items is performed to determine a common delivery date for all items. Afterwards, for the allocation reservations only the confirmation dates are adapted, but not the consumption periods, in which allocation quantity is reserved. This can lead to the fact that quantities are consumed in earlier time periods although the confirmation and hence the planned delivery of the items is later. This is a sub-optimal result in case of capacity-based product allocations, as the allocation quantities represent production or transport capacities, which should optimally be consumed at the confirmation time point and not earlier. Mitigation: Avoid capacity-based product allocation checks for sales BOM items. + Alternative-Based Confirmation (ABC) SAP S/4HANA 1909 supports the productive use of ABC functionality only for initial plant determination during sales order creation (inquiry, quotation, contracts, ete. are not supported). In addition, ABC can be used to process previously posted line items, in VAo2 or with BOP. 1. Problem: Scheduling Agreements with Delivery Schedules Prerequisite: ABC is set up in a way, that a valid substitution strategy would be found according to the attributes in the alternative control. Mitigation: Do not use ABC for scheduling agreements with delivery schedules 2. Problem: ‘Other Plants' button is gone Prerequisite: A line item has been checked with ABC and, therefore, the original material-plant combination has changed. Mitigation: Configure ABC to ensure that the best plant is determined automatically. Explanation: This behavior is correct. ABC will, in the long-term, offer interactive plant manipulation capabilities. 3. Problem: No ABC evaluation for sales BOM items (see also limitation 5) Prerequisite: A requirement relevant subitem of a sales BOM (LUMF) is checked and a valid substitution strategy is determined. Explanation: A sales BOM is plant-specific. Substituting the plant for single subitems might, therefore, lead to inconsistent results, 4, Problem: When checking availability for a substitute, PAC and PAL checks are executed using the customizing settings for the original requirement Explanation: This could have multiple unexpected side effects: PAL quantities are consumed for requirements which are not PAL-relevant. These quantities will remain and will not automatically be removed during further processing, Similarly, PAC checks are executed even if customized. Mitigation: Ensure that all potential alternative plants are configured similarly to the original plant, at the veryJeast with regards to the requirement relevancy setting and ATP relevancy setting in their corresponding, requirement classes. 5. Problem: No inline substitution within a subitem Explanation: The plant change in an item which is a subitem of another item is not yet implemented. 6. Problem: ABC in Make-to-Stock (MTS) scenario only Prerequisite: The sales order is created in the context of special stock scenarios (for example, Make-to-Order (MTO)). Explanation: From a PAC perspective, ABC would normally create subitems in the MTS segment only. In other scenarios (for example, MTO or project), there is no stock to confirm against during requirement creation; itis possible to have non-MTS subitems. ABC shall, therefore, not modify or delete these subitems. + Sales Order Processing - "Other Plants” function on the delivery proposal sereen 1, Problem: Issues with Product Allocation Check Details: Checking availability in other plants in simulation mode is based on the PAC method only. Furthermore, the requested material availability date for the other plants is taken directly from the original sales order item and is not scheduled using the original requested delivery date. Mitigation: New scheduling will take place when a specific plant is selected and will use the check methods as. customized. 2. Problem: "Other Plants" does not work for ABC items. Prerequisite: A line item has been checked with ABC. The original material-plant has, therefore, changed. Mitigation: Configure ABC to determine the best plant automatically. Explanation: This behavior is correct. ABC will offer interactive plant manipulation capabilities in the long-term. + Sales Order Processing ~ Manual change of shipping dates of the schedule line data 1. Problem: The availability check overrides manually changed shipping dates with new scheduling results Details: As soon as the availability check needs to schedule the dates again, manually changed shipping dates will be overwritten with the new scheduling results. This happens, for example, if the confirmation is not on-time, or if the product allocation check is involved which can check based on different date time types (like delivery date, goods issue date or material availability date). Mitigation: Do not manually change the shipping dates Ifyou have any questions relating to the above, please contact your SAP consultant. | Attributes Key Value Other Components ‘Cross-Application Components > Available to Promise (ATP) (CA-ATP) | Software Components Software Component From To ‘And subsequent S4CORE 104 104 | This document refers to SAP Note/KBA Component Title 2885961 XX-SER-REL Restriction Note for advanced Available-to-Promise (aATP) in SAP S/4IANA 2020 2799003 XX-SER-REL SAP $/4HANA 1909: Restriction Note 2642047 XX-SER-REL — Restriction Note for advanced Available-to-Promise (aATP) in SAP $/4HANA 1809. 2518072 XX-SER-REL — Restriction Note for advanced Available-to-Promise (aATP) SAP $/4HANA 1709 2343524 Restriction Note for advanced Available-to-Promise (aA TP) in SAP S/4HANA 1610| This document is referenced by SAP Component Title Note/KBA 275747 Restriction Note for advanced Available-to-Promise (aNTP) in SAP S/4HANA 2023 3205013, XX-SER-—_Resitietion Note for advanced Available-to-Promise (aATP) in SAP S/4HANA 2002 and 2022 FPSo1 and FPSo2 2982461 Restriction Note for advanced Available-to-Promise (aATP) in SAP S/4HANA 2021 2885961 Restriction Note for advanced Available-to-Promise (aATP) in SAP S/4HANA 2020. 2861764 ATP-Groupcheck out of Service Order or Service Notification 2799003 XX-SER- _ SAPS/4HANA 1900: Restriction Note