In this blog, I’ll discuss a few approaches to compare DME trees, validations, substitutions, CO templates (CPT3), and other things. Usually, much care must be taken before transferring these kind of modifications to the Production Client. To prevent major inconsistencies, care should be taken to make sure that some existing values in the Production Client are not replaced by values from the Development Client or Quality Client. Other times, we could be asked to make comparisons between the values of several clients for auditing purposes. I’ll also talk about the typical SAP document relationship functionalities.

It would be easier to grasp the sensitivity of the Client comparisons with a little more context. Here, we limit the comparison to DME Trees and FI/CO/AA/PC Validations/Substitutions. We all know that landscape maintenance differs from client to client, and as a result, so may the controls used. Changes may occasionally be permitted directly in the Production Client using Firefighter ID or another method. FIRE FIGHTER ID definition | SAP Community. Other times, it is likely that only adjustments made through transports to production are permitted. Both styles may be used in other situations due to urgency. The end effect is that there is a potential that the Production Client will not be in sync with Quality or Development, which could occasionally result in the overwriting of table values. Therefore, it is crucial to compare DME Tree values or perform Validation / Substitution before moving the Transports between landscapes. Regarding the disclaimer, the information presented here is intended for the purpose of knowledge sharing and may be helpful in some situations but not in other circumstances.

Now, before getting into the intricacies of the comparison of the aforementioned items, I’d want to quickly go over some of the common capabilities offered by SAP. We have two features, called “Adjust” and “Compare.” When using Compare, only the values shared by two clients are shown together with the line items, exactly as they are, regardless of any variances. By updating the Comparison Client with the login Client, it is also feasible to sync two Clients in the case of “Adjust.”

The screen prints that follow are designed for anyone who are unfamiliar with this functionality. Users can check out this utility tool wherever it is offered because it is present in many configuration panels. “Comparison” and “Adjust” options are offered for Transaction OBBH and OB52, respectively.

Screen 1

Screen 2

Individual Users can further explore the features on some of the screens that arise during this process.

Picture 3

The window below appears when you select the “Compare” option, for instance, in the case of OBB8, making it easier to connect to another Client. We can follow the comparative processes and even choose which fields are necessary.

Screen 4

Screen 5

Screen 6

Any test should only be conducted in a sandbox or playground setting until one becomes accustomed to it. Client comparison also pertains to transactions SCU0 and OY19. supplying a link to a blog with excellent information Site Link 1.

To access more helpful SAP documentation, click here (SAP Library – Integration). Please see note 2995779

But now, we’ll concentrate on things like DME trees, validations, substitutions, and other things that lack these kinds of common comparison properties. Here, we must devise our own methods for comparing the specifics of two clients, which we will do one at a time.


Choose the necessary Tree in Transaction DMEE, then choose to download it as an XML file (Path: Format Tree > Download XML file). Select “Active” (or “Maintenance” depending on the situation) in the pop-up window, and then enter the download file location as displayed in the sample screen in the following window. Get the XML downloads from both Clients by repeating the identical processes in the other Client (Quality/Production, etc.).

Screen 7

Screen 8

On the internet, there are free programmes that may be used to compare these two XML downloads. Before relocating the Transport, the tree can be adjusted as needed based on the discrepancies found in the comparison tool. The alternative method is to compare the two downloads by copying and pasting the XML file into Excel (say from Development and Quality or Production). Most browsers make it easy to replicate the exact XML structure into Excel. To determine if there are any differences between the two trees, a line-by-line comparison using the ‘True/False’ statement (=A1=B1) or simply a straightforward ‘VLOOKUP’ can be performed. The illustration below is merely meant to serve as an example.

Screen 9


Regarding Validation / Substitution, I came across an amazing blog that also included the necessary ABAP code to create a unique programme and compare clients. 2. blog link

Although that is a possibility, I also utilise one that is comparable to the DME comparison. In this case, we must download the necessary Validation or substitute (specific to one Validation at a time) from both Clients as a text file. Typically, a group of companies will share the same Validation or Substitution, or each Company will be assigned a single Validation.

Screen 10

Click Validation twice to go to the following stage.

Screen 11

The file can be saved as plain text after completing Print steps 1 and 2, as seen below. You’ll see that the summary includes an easy comparison of all the processes.

Screen 12

Screen 13

Once both downloads have been saved as text files, they may be compared using the same True/False or VLOOKUP methods by copying the text files into an Excel spreadsheet. This would aid in bringing any disparities to light. To make the contents of the text file look more compact, unnecessary elements like borders and other formatting could be deleted after copying the contents to Excel. While comparing two tables, you can also move the rows around in the Excel file as necessary.

Screen 14

CO and CPT3 templates:

This is almost identical to Validation / Substitution, and the navigation path for data download is provided below for quick reference. First, go to Transaction CPT3 and specify the Controlling Area in OKKS. Follow the pull-down menu’s directions to select Environment > Hierarchy.

Screen 15

Open the Tree in the following screen, choose the relevant node, and then double-click it to see the summary information for comparison. The output can be downloaded in its original format as a text file and, like in the former instance, copied to Excel for comparison.

Screen 16

The Excel screen is only being used as an example.

Screen 17

This blog will be useful for transactions like DMEE, OB28, OBBH, OKC7, OKC9, 0KEL, and asset validation, among others.

Associated Documents:

We are aware that there is a path: option in SAP FI Document display (FB03) to examine all connected Accounting documents. Environment > Document Environment> Accounting Documents displays all accounting documents, such as CO, PC, COPA, and Special Ledger, while Environment > Document Environment> Original Document displays original documents, such as SD Billing or MM Invoice. Another option reveals the connections between a specific FI Document and different transactions relating to finance and logistics. Additionally, you can double-click on those particular documents to examine them. We can access ‘n’ related documents for any analysis from a FI Document by navigating to them. Even those will be shown if a FI Document has IDocs attached to it. Viewing Sales documents, Purchase documents, IDocs, and other types of documents is possible by expanding each node.

Screen 18

Screen 19

Similar to this, by selecting the “Integration” button from a COPA document, we can view the associated objects. Every radio button selection leads to the appropriate master data or document.

Screen 20

All follow-on documents are once again available in the display when selecting the “Relationship Browser” radio button, just like in the case of FI. A really strong feature, which some people might not be aware of.

Screen 21

To learn more, click the SAP assistance link provided. The application “RDRBFI00” can also be used to collect information about document relationships. Aid Link.

Finally, I’d like to mention a BAPI that might be used to obtain any further FI Documents. We can obtain these links using “BAPI ACC DOCUMENTS RECORD.” This particular BAPI has had numerous mentions in this topic, and I’m also including a link to a blog about it. 3. Blog Link

I began researching this BAPI thanks to one of Ajay’s blogs, which may be found at the supplied URL. The site is easy to read, provides a step-by-step tutorial, and is highly informative. Nevertheless, I’m providing the data that I entered and got the outcomes shown in the screens below. These deviate slightly from what is mentioned in the blog in question. I’m not sure if there are further ways to retrieve the findings, though. Users can also test it out on their own systems and, if necessary, ask developers for assistance. This is quite practical and useful for customised reports.

Screen 22

Send the values listed below for the first table.

Screen 23

Following execution, we receive the outcomes depicted in the following screen. To display line item details, click the ‘Result’ button.

Screen 24

Screen 25

All screen prints presented here, some of which have significant details obscured, are merely for illustration. I hope this was useful, and I know that your insightful comments and criticism will help us continue to raise the bar.

I appreciate you reading.