How To Fix REBDAO060 - Arch. object with ID &1 already exists in the hierarchy

REBDAO060 - Overview

• Message type: E = Error

• Message class: REBDAO -

• Message number: 060

• Message text: Arch. object with ID &1 already exists in the hierarchy

What causes this issue?

You want to create architectural object <ZH>&V1&</><ZH> [&V2&]</>. For
this object type, number assignment is set up so that numbering is based
on the top object in the hierarchy.
In the hierarchy of this top object, however, there is already an object
with this number: <ZH>&V1&</><ZH> [&V3&]</>.

System Response

The system does not accept this number.

How to fix this error?

Choose a different object number.

Procedure for System Administrators

The system issues an error message and will not allow you to continue with this transaction until the error is resolved.

Error message extract from SAP system. Copyright SAP SE.

Smart SAP Assistant

• What is the cause and solution for SAP error message REBDAO060 - Arch. object with ID &1 already exists in the hierarchy ?

  The SAP error message REBDAO060 indicates that there is an attempt to create or insert an archive object with an ID that already exists in the hierarchy. This typically occurs in the context of archiving documents or data in SAP, where each object must have a unique identifier.
  
  Cause:
  The error can be caused by several factors:
  
  Duplicate Entry: The archive object ID you are trying to create or insert already exists in the system.
  Incorrect Data: There may be an issue with the data being processed, leading to an attempt to create a duplicate entry.
  System Configuration: The configuration settings for archiving may not be set up correctly, leading to conflicts in object IDs.
  
  
  Solution:
  To resolve the REBDAO060 error, you can take the following steps:
  
  
  Check Existing Entries: 
  
  Use transaction codes like SARA (Archive Administration) to check if the archive object ID already exists. You can search for the specific ID in the archive object hierarchy.
  
  
  
  Correct