HA201 – SAP HANA 2.0 SPS06 – High Availability and Disaster Tolerance Administration — Lesson 4: Disaster Simulation, Root-Cause Review, and Runbook Handover

Learning Objectives

• Explain how Disaster Simulation, Root-Cause Review, and Runbook Handover supports resilient HANA continuity.
• Complete the workflow and produce a reviewable HANA disaster-recovery assurance plan.
• Evaluate the condition where a disaster exercise meets uptime expectations but lacks evidence of data consistency and select a supported response.

Detailed Topics

• Failure scenario exercises: monitoring views, reports, and indicators used to evaluate the completed process result.
• Replication alert analysis: reconciliation tests that connect source data, documents, balances, and operational outcomes.
• Recovery validation tests: root-cause methods for separating data, configuration, access, timing, and execution issues.
• Runbook ownership and review: ownership, review frequency, escalation, and improvement controls required after handover.

Instructor Demonstration

Using the stated scenario, the instructor demonstrates Failure scenario exercises, Replication alert analysis, Recovery validation tests, Runbook ownership and review. Particular attention is given to object relationships, field or status behavior, integration effects, and how HANA disaster-recovery assurance plan supports review. The demonstration deliberately introduces the exception where a disaster exercise meets uptime expectations but lacks evidence of data consistency.

Hands-On Exercise

Complete a controlled activity covering Failure scenario exercises, Replication alert analysis, Recovery validation tests, Runbook ownership and review and preserve the final result in HANA disaster-recovery assurance plan.

1. Confirm the business objective, organizational scope, required roles, source data, and expected SAP result.
2. Execute the workflow in sequence while recording settings, transactions, documents, messages, and observations.
3. Introduce the stated exception and isolate the earliest point where observed behavior differs from expectation.
4. Correct or contain the issue, retest the outcome, and document ownership, evidence, and follow-up.

Scenario Analysis

• Which SAP object, rule, master record, or process step most strongly influences the observed result?
• What evidence distinguishes a configuration problem from data, authorization, integration, or timing causes?
• How should the HANA disaster-recovery assurance plan be approved, retained, monitored, and updated after handover?

Troubleshooting Guidance

Start at the earliest point where expected SAP behavior differs from the observed result. Review process sequence, master data, organizational assignments, configuration, authorization, integration, and timing separately. Treat “a disaster exercise meets uptime expectations but lacks evidence of data consistency” as a testable hypothesis until settings, documents, logs, reports, and retest outcomes confirm the cause.

Validation Checklist

• Required structures, master data, roles, settings, and dependencies for Disaster Simulation, Root-Cause Review, and Runbook Handover are present.
• The HANA disaster-recovery assurance plan connects each conclusion to objective, reviewable SAP evidence.
• Normal processing, the stated exception, integration behavior, and access boundaries were tested.
• Corrections, retest criteria, ownership, documentation, monitoring, and operational handover are complete.

Lesson Outcome

Learners can apply Disaster Simulation, Root-Cause Review, and Runbook Handover, explain the resulting SAP behavior, and defend the outcome through HANA disaster-recovery assurance plan.