The following graphics show through which InfoProvider the data from the DataSources in the back end

flows to the
queries:

The difference between these TWO Extractors are

1) 0FI_GL_10 pulls only Leading Ledgers (0L)
If company has any Satutory Ledgers then we need to use
the following transaction FAGLBW03 & create Data sources
EG: 3FI_GL_TT_ST .. Etc
Each Ledger we have to create 2 data sources
1) Totals
2) Line Items & load data into BI
2) 0FI_GL_20 Pulls all Ledgers Totals
Similarlly it applies for line items
1) 0FI_GL_4
2) 0FI_GL_14
replaced with 0FI_GL_40. If you need more info let us know I'll send more info on the same.
The difference between these TWO Extractors are
1) 0FI_GL_10 pulls only Leading Ledgers (0L)
If company has any Satutory Ledgers then we need to use
the following transaction FAGLBW03 & create Data sources
EG: 3FI_GL_TT_ST .. Etc
Each Ledger we have to create 2 data sources
1) Totals
2) Line Items & load data into BI

2) 0FI_GL_20 Pulls all Ledgers Totals

Similarlly it applies for line items
1) 0FI_GL_4
2) 0FI_GL_14
replaced with 0FI_GL_40.
If you need more info let us know I'll send more info on the same.
0FI_GL_50 - This G/L Plan extrator (FAGLFLEXP)
and CO (including CCA, CO-PA and excluding PCA).
We use the splitting functionalities by Profit Center/Segment to cover the requirement to have a complete
Balance sheet and Profit & loss (IFRS Compliant)
We defined the Allocation model using the following functionalities:
- CO Allocation (Distribution) with Real Time Integration CO-FI.
To manage allocation only between Cost Center
- FI Allocation
To manage allocation only between Profit Center/Segment
The issue happens during FI reconcliliation postings:
1. During Real Time Integration CO-FI, the FI document doesn't post on BS accounts because the
original CO document cannot involve BS Accounts
2. During FI Allocation we need to allocate in the same time BS and P&L accounts used in the same FI
document with the correspondent amount. The FI Allocation allows us to allocate only the account
balance.
These two problems doesn't allow us to have the right P&L and BS by Segment.
How can we solve it?

We had identified 0FI_GL_40 Datasource, which gave us the utmost information that we needed.
Have a word with FICO, and ask them the level of reconciliation of PCA and COPA reporting.
The logic is below:
CO documents are not always 1:1 mapping to FI documents.
It allows allocations or secondary cost postings between CO structures (CO elements/cost centres settlement from internal order) and it checks for those documents that do not exist in FI
So if you have a 1:1 mapping then fine then u will get a FI document if not -then u might be getting a
secondary costing document.

The EhP3 promises more than it delivers...

It basically is a suite of web templates hanging off multicubeswith added RRI functionality (ie replicating
FBL3N, FBL5N and FBL1N in R3)
The multicubes work off a remote cube looking at R3 line items or a BW cube
Ide abeing - if you want up to date info then go to R3 via the BW multicube - if last nights is fine go to the
BW cube
It is basically a one stop shop for reporting for Finance users - ie no need to use R3 and BW for the same
information
But the base problem of the lack of before and after images for FI extractors still remain
The clever way would be to add the delta to last nights cube in a multicube - but you can;t do that without
problem in throughput time due to the need for an ODS to resolve duplicates (saying that - I have a
prototype somewhere which does do it - but uses CCA instead)
Anyway back to the question - which extractors
Really depends on whether you go for the Classic GL or New GL - and go from there..
I for one will be installing the AR, AP and CO content form EhP3 - I will leave the GL for the time being

--