9 Replies Latest reply on Jul 5, 2019 11:21 AM by Tully Krastins

    SAP R3 Jobs - Copy exiting vs direct configuration

    Peter Reuschlein
      Share This:

      Dear Community,

       

      i succeeded the Control-M Service from a former colleague and currently trying to get a feeling for the current setup and its pros/cons.

      I went through most of the documentation but was not able to find a best-practice or pro/con part for the planning of SAP R3 Jobs.

       

      Currently all our R3 Jobs are scheduled using planned Jobs within the SAP System which are copied by Control-M.

       

      Do you use the same configuration or do you plan your Jobs directly within CM ?

       

      Is there a Best-Practice which should be the favourable way ?

       

      Thank you in advance & best regards

      Peter

        • 1. Re: SAP R3 Jobs - Copy exiting vs direct configuration
          Mark Francome

          Hi Peter,

           

          It is a long time since I scheduled SAP R3 via Control-M but we used to do all the work via Control-M. All Control-M is doing is to display a version of the SAP scheduling interface, so it really should be just down to personal preference. I guess us Control-Mers would be happier using Control-M as it puts all scheduling into a single gui.

          2 of 2 people found this helpful
          • 2. Re: SAP R3 Jobs - Copy exiting vs direct configuration
            Adriano Gomes

            Hi Peter Reuschlein

             

            IMHO for the sake of continuity requirements, All the times I was in a position to advise I recommended to leverage the good aspect of both SAP and Control-M platforms by "Copying the Last existing schedulled" due to the following:

             

            1) SAP Jobs are not as usual and comprehensive as regular Control-M job types like Command and OS Job which require commands or scripts locally or remotely accessible by an Agent , There are some specific terminology and concepts like Variants, steps, client, logon Group, and so on. All these specific concepts are better handled by SAP users, so they are the best person to Define the Original Copy of the Job that will be run by Control-M call.

             

            2) The same way as the Control-M Concept of "Embedded Script" can be used as a capability to centralize the access level and a single repository for production assets to audit and control changes and versioning on the Job Language code, having Control-M SAP Jobs defined entirely into control-M database can drive the business continuity into a SPOF when some sudden downtime happen to control-M platform, the operations can not recover and run jobs manually guided by the production books because most of the times there are not copies of production scripts available locally, parameters variables documentation, and dependency sequencing. The same way would happen to SAP jobs entirely dependent on Control-M platform to authenticate, define and run a new job on the fly whereas as looking for it local job image saved on SAP where both Control-M platform and also Operators can have access to it guided by the production books by and perform triggering, with this approach all the conceptual aspects of an SAP job are preserved on SAP Side.

             

            The cons, you may have reduced the Control-M automation capability when define jobs dynamically prior its execution, but its safe enough to allow production recovery when required.

             

            I hope it can takes you to a safe decision,

             

            My Best

             

            A>Gomes

            3 of 3 people found this helpful
            • 3. Re: SAP R3 Jobs - Copy exiting vs direct configuration
              Peter Reuschlein

              Hi Adriano Gomes,

               

              thanks for the insight - i think the business continuity point is rather important for us, so i´ll stick to the current configuration.

               

              thank you & Best Regards

              Peter

              1 of 1 people found this helpful
              • 4. Re: SAP R3 Jobs - Copy exiting vs direct configuration
                Tully Krastins

                Hi Peter,

                 

                I'm not entirely sure that I agree with Adriano's statement regarding Control-M becoming the SPOF if SAP jobs are defined in CTM and created on the fly. In reality all one needs is an SAP program name and variant name to run in a nominal shop. I've been to many, many SAP shops and they all run their SAP production jobs on Client 100 in RP1. My experience is that it comes down to a matter of control. Those Operations Managers who want tight control over their operation want their people (operations assets) managing the production definition and flow. Others, who aren't as concerned with rigoros management control, let the SAP Functional users define and manage their SAP jobs. Production Control staff expertise and experience often play into that as well. SAP R3 job definitions really are no different than any other jobs, be they PeopleSoft, Oracle, web interface, SQL, OS command, etc., etc., etc. Any responsible Operations Manager will ensure the core applications are all HA enabled. Job Scheduling (workload automation, these days) is a core application.

                • 5. Re: SAP R3 Jobs - Copy exiting vs direct configuration
                  Mark Francome

                  The solution to CM being an SPoF is simple, make CM the highest-available platform in your infrastructure.

                  • 6. Re: SAP R3 Jobs - Copy exiting vs direct configuration
                    Adriano Gomes

                    Hi Tully Krastins

                    Indeed Business Continuity is sometimes neglected when Automation tools like Control-M is being implemented and due to the fact those tools takes all businesses production knowledge out of the Operations heroes with its comprehensive capabilities, and months after production go live, on the first major failure on network section that links to SAP Boxes and no jobs can be targeted to SAP applications Servers by CTM Agents, that most of times are not well placed within a resilient and fault tolerant architectural design, you got yourself and your operations with nothing documented and no way out to manually keep the business flows going on.

                     

                    Not just resilient, fault tolerant and HA Enabled as mentioned by Yourself and  Mark Francome but Also having the CTM Agent deployed at the right place within the architecture design will shorter the SPOF's.

                     

                    I am not so sure SAP Jobs are just as common and comprehensive for a non SAP World Guy with no Documentation in hands as any other OS jobs, but definitely Control-M capabilities is seamless the Glue that ties it all together and provide the same capabilities to ALL workloads needs.

                     

                    My Best to You ALL

                     

                    A>Gomes

                    1 of 1 people found this helpful
                    • 7. Re: SAP R3 Jobs - Copy exiting vs direct configuration
                      Tully Krastins

                      Hi Adriano

                       

                      Why do you say there is no documentation? Even CTM schedulers are not smart enough to create SAP (or any other) jobs without input from a user of what the job does and where it does it. There ALWAYS is documentation when SAP jobs are created and maintained in CTM. Granted, the CTM scheduler must have some SAP knowledge and understanding so that, in case of the loss of connectivity, s/he can log into SAP and utilize transactons SM36 and SM37 to define, schedule and run the jobs. That would not be too much different than for the process if the jobs were defined in SAP. Regardless of where the CTM job definition is maintained, the executable program/transaction and the variant are maintained in SAP.

                       

                      Warmest regards,

                      Tully

                      • 8. Re: SAP R3 Jobs - Copy exiting vs direct configuration
                        Adriano Gomes

                        Hi Tully Krastins

                         

                        This is just to create the situation where Business Continuity can be seen and also the need for "process documentation" mainly those ones that are automated. I know for sure there is documentation available for production recovery in case of none or partial availability of  the automation platform .

                         

                        Regarding SAP Jobs, sometimes they are multiple steps with variants and very complex to be defined by hand and I really do not see even an  "outstanding" human being capable of re-define them under the pressure of a contingency situation, I rather see easier just list sm36 and find, copy and fire an existing SAP job. 

                         

                        My Best,  

                         

                        A>Gomes

                        • 9. Re: SAP R3 Jobs - Copy exiting vs direct configuration
                          Tully Krastins

                          Hi Adriano,

                           

                          Yes, if an organization has complex, multi-step SAP jobs then certainly just running them within the SAP scheduler would be simpler and business continuity would be better served. My best practices recommendation to any SAP shop is "one step per Control-M job."

                           

                          Warmest regards,

                          Tully

                          1 of 1 people found this helpful