27-12-2021, 07:32 PM
Ok, I tested myself with a technology, which has its efficiencies defined in a scenario file.
I am seeing the TFM_MIG table working well, provided that the TFM_MIG scenario, which defines the modified EFFs, is sequenced alphabetically after the source scenario. That's because VEDA can only take values from alphabetically preceding scenarios when processing MIG tables (but, to my knowledge, from any Subreses or Base templates, @Amit: is that correct?).
Therefore, can you confirm whether your MIG scenario was alphabetically later or not (than the source scenario)?
I am seeing the TFM_MIG table working well, provided that the TFM_MIG scenario, which defines the modified EFFs, is sequenced alphabetically after the source scenario. That's because VEDA can only take values from alphabetically preceding scenarios when processing MIG tables (but, to my knowledge, from any Subreses or Base templates, @Amit: is that correct?).
Therefore, can you confirm whether your MIG scenario was alphabetically later or not (than the source scenario)?