A customer wants to convert from SAP BW powered by SAP HANA to SAP BW/4HANA Which strategy does SAP recommend based on successor object types? Note: There are 3 correct answers to this question

Question

Options

• AUse Write Interface-Enabled Data Store objects (advanced) instead of Virtual Providers.
• BUse Semantic Groups to organize big data volumes in Data Store objects (advanced).
• CUse ODP SAP source system type instead of a DB-connect
• DUse Composite Providers instead of Info Sets.
• EUse Open ODS Views to establish virtual access for master and transactional data.

• A
  80% (24)
• B
  7% (2)
• C
  13% (4)

Explanation

When migrating from SAP BW (on HANA) to SAP BW/4HANA, SAP maps legacy objects to modernized successors. Write Interface-Enabled DSOs (advanced) replace Virtual Providers that used a write interface, since BW/4HANA eliminates classic Virtual Provider types in favor of advanced DSOs with native write capability (A). Composite Providers are the direct successor to InfoSets, consolidating multiple data sources with full BW/4HANA optimization support (D). Open ODS Views provide lightweight, virtual access to both master and transactional data from external sources without physical data loading, replacing older virtual access patterns (E).

Why B is wrong: Semantic Groups are a feature within DSO (advanced) for partitioning large data volumes - they're an optimization option, not a successor object type for any legacy BW object.

Why C is wrong: ODP-based source systems replace the classic SAP BW extractor source system type, not DB-Connect. DB-Connect is used for non-SAP databases and has its own migration path; conflating the two is a common trap.

Memory tip: Think of the three correct answers as covering the three migration scenarios - write (A: Virtual Provider → Write-Interface DSO), combine (D: InfoSet → CompositeProvider), view (E: virtual access → Open ODS View). The verb gives you the object: write, combine, view.

No community discussion yet for this question.