Page Comparison

1. Create a basis for discussion with the Functional Department what is needed in terms of reporting
2. Identify unneeded objects that can be deleted/cleaned up
3. Check Data Flows for (also for nested ABAP/AMDP) logic that is not always immediately visible
4. Understand overall complexity in mapping for the whole data flow at once
5. Identify Queries that have not been used for a long(er) time.
6. Understand the dependencies from one BW Object to nearly all other elements (including ABAP/AMDP)
7. Understand what is on which system available. Are all Queries/InfoProviders/etc. transported and available in all Systems? All emergency changes from PROD maintained in DEV as well?

1. /wiki/spaces/DPUM192/pages/512103569
2. There are several System Scout functions for that:
   1. List InfoProvider without Usage in Data Flows
   2. Last Load and Usage Analysis
   3. Show inactive Objects
   4. Unused InfoObjects
   5. Variables Analyzer
3. Data Flow Analysis
4. Data Lineage of BW Entities
5. Use "Grid View" with "Column Chooser" and column "Last Used Date": Column Chooser
6. Usage of BW Entities
7. Mass comparison: Compare Entities of Systems. Individual comparison: Comparison of Elements (can also be triggered form the mass comparison for different elements; detailed mass comparison coming soon)

1. 40%-60%
2. 20%-50%
3. 35%-45%
4. 20%-40%
5. ~5%
6. 5%-15%
7. 50%-80%

1. You need to take over data models to BW/4HANA or BW on HANA while still adjusting existing naming conventions.
2. You want to take over (some/many/all) Queries to the new and adjusted data model to secure basic processes within functional/reporting departments.
3. You need to translate elements in the Data Warehouse to reflect two/several languages using a dictionary instead of doing this manually.
4. You want to use consistent Naming Conventions.
5. Go through all DTPs and ensure that they are relevant for loading and are used/implemented in process chains.

1. Migration Booster
2. Copy Reporting Elements
3. Translation Steward
4. Check Naming Conventions of BW Entities with System Scout (also possible from transports)
5. Show DTPs used and not used in process chains: Show DTPs and InfoPackages incl. Filters

1. 80%-95%
2. 80%-95%
3. 50%-70%
4. 5%-15%
5. 50%-70%

For Bug Fixing aspects - see also Phase "Support"

If you have more good ideas, please let us know how we can support you even more and create a feature request.

1. Use existing documentation and specifically added information (comments) for objects to understand additionally required procedures/impacts/etc. (special loading, activation order, etc.).

more coming soon...

If you have a good idea, please let us know how we can support you even more and create a feature request!

1. BW Commenting + BW Documentation especially: Scenarios

1. ~5%

1. Support general resolutions for data:
   1. You need to understand how mappings are done within Data Flows, to be able to identify errors.
   2. Here it is also important to understand what ABAP/AMDP routines do and..
   3. ..if there are any relevant DTP/IP Filter and selections that influence processing or that has been changed due to singular events (testing, one-time loading, etc.) but have not been reversed.

1. Data Flow Analysis - here especially:
   1. Mapping Analysis of InfoObjects
   2. Look-Up Analysis
   3. Show DTPs and InfoPackages incl. Filters

1. 15%-40%
   
   1. 20%-50%
   2. ~10%
   3. ~10%

1. Preserve knowledge for later use, changes in team structure, etc.
2. Creating documentation for different target groups (Functional Department, Audits, IT, etc.)

1. BW Commenting 
2. BW Documentation especially: Scenarios

1. at least 15% depending on how well it is used later.
2. 10%-40%