Sometimes batch totals and transaction counts get corrupted in GP, there can be many reasons behind this.
To correct them the check links maintenance routine can be executed for “Sales Work”. This will correct the batch totals but will take a very long time to run and is not the sort of thing to be doing during working hours.
Alternatively corrections can be made via SQL which is quick and can address multiple batches,
Reconciling SOP Batches - The Dynamics GP Blogstersome thought needs to be put into batch locking etc if this is to be used regularly as the script in its current form does not check if it is “allowed” to update the batch totals.
Similar post: Reconciling SOP Batches from WITHIN Dynamics GP
Today I found out another way that I thought worth recording for future reference, printing an edit list for the batch. Although this can only be used one batch at a time, it is quick and “built in” to GP.
Go to the Sales Batch Entry Window…
Select the SOP batch of interest and click the print icon.
In the Form to Print combo box, select Edit List and then click the print button.
Select a destination (to screen) in the print destination window that follows. After printing, leaving the batch and then going back into the batch, the totals will be found to be corrected.
Thanks for the hint from Jorge Mejia on GP forums: https://community.dynamics.com/gp/f/32/p/241273/665571#665571
So you want to turn off multiple binning in Dynamics GP and need to record the multiple bin where the stock is held back into the basic single bin field against each location?
This script I just used to do that, it will pick the multiple bin with the most stock as the one to use for the single bin field. I would take a snapshot of the multiple bins table into excel, just for the record if performing this change (IV00112) and for future reference.
,ROW_NUMBER() OVER (
PARTITION BY ITEMNMBR
,LOCNCODE ORDER BY QUANTITY DESC
WHERE qtytype = 1
JOIN IV00102 ON CTE.ITEMNMBR=IV00102.ITEMNMBR AND iv00102.LOCNCODE=CTE.LOCNCODE
WHERE RowSort = 1
AND BIN !=BINNMBR
Then, turn off multiple bins in the inventory setup window, and reconcile the inventory after doing so.
We almost settle on one set of names for the realigned Dynamics ERP and CRM products when another set of product names seem to be upon us.
As Steve Endow points out, the CRM community seem to have claimed the “Dynamics 365” moniker for themselves (just see all the twitter activity and company marketing emails for proof), whilst the Dynamics ERP community are left with the scratty end of the deal when it comes to naming.
As the ERP products are migrated and morphed into new cloud & on-premises solutions, new names are certainly required to describe the new shape of offerings. The table below shows product names, previous to June 2017, with “Operations” and “Financials” differentiating the reinvention and re-imagination of what were the traditional Microsoft Dynamics AX and NAV offerings, respectively.
|Current Name ||New name (June 2017)|
|Dynamics 365 for Operations ||Dynamics 365 for Finance and Operations Enterprise edition|
|Dynamics 365 for Financials ||Dynamics 365 for Finance and Operations Business edition|
As the Financials product development has gathered pace, it is now obvious that it will eventually encompass the same (to all intents and purposes) set of functionality as the current NAV on-premise solution does today, thus inventory, warehouse management, manufacturing and more. Obviously this scope breaks far beyond a simple accounting function inferred by the “financials” naming and thus I can understand the need to re-frame the product name.
Enterprise and Business edition
So it is June 2017 it seems in rolls Enterprise and Business edition naming. This is to show the scale difference between the companies that the two solutions are targeted at, whilst attempting to also maintain the marketing message that they belong firmly to the same Dynamics 365 family tree. The name also tells the customer that the solutions will do everything they need, both finance functions and run the company operationally.Whilst the naming is more appropriate I have a small alarm to ring with the choice of Enterprise and Business as words to show scale. Todd McDaniel in the recent Enterprise Software Podcast pointed out that outside the software community Enterprise and Business do not perhaps indicate the scale of a company, as a marketing device this may not work as intended. I have to agree, in the United Kingdom this is even worse.
In the USA smaller to mid size companies are usually referred to as SMB - Small and Midsize Business, you see and hear this term all the time.
In European Union and international organizations such as the World Bank, the United Nations and the World Trade Organization, the term SME is used - Small and Medium Enterprise.
|SMB ||Small and Midsize Business|
|SME ||Small and Medium Enterprise|
SME is the term you hear all the time in the United Kingdom where you would use SMB in the US. Can you see the problem? Indeed Business and don’t Enterprise differentiate the scale of a company in our territory! -Whoops!
Although this is not a show stopper, it does mean companies selling the ERP orientated D365 solutions will have a little extra work cut out for them in other parts of the world as the significance of the meaning for Enterprise and Business will need to be explained to prospective customer CEOs, CFOs in the pre-sales marketing literature and meetings.
From time to time you encounter systems where the company style is to capitalise names in the system. I know of users who might as well glue the caps-lock on!
If faced with the, we have always done it this way problem, fight it. Excuses come out like its for users with vision problems (there are magnifiers and system tools to help there), improves clarity for parcels going overseas to other cultures (I doubt it makes much difference in compter type, maybe for hand written?), etc.
Capitalisation is a lossy process
In the context of company names, street names, people names, the capitalisation can be important as it conveys information that is lost if it is presented in entirely uppercase.
- McKenzie vs MCKENZIE
- O'Donnell vs O'DONNEL
- MacBain VS MACBAIN
There are many others and in other cultures where the capitalisation conveys information that cannot be recovered again if lose, by the use of automated processing.
It makes it look bad for mail merges later too
"Dear Mr ODONNEL
Thank you for your order."
Just looks bad.
Thus don’t shout at your customers with capitals, use your SHIFT keys!