• Introducing Dark Mode! Switch by clicking on the lightbulb icon next to Search or by clicking on Default style at the bottom left of the page!

F43121 Corruption of APTD values

david_mallory

Well Known Member
Don,

More info about your problem with field APTD. My memory woke up: even with
multi-line vouchers, you can go to file F0411 vouchers and get amount in
field AG and this will be same as amount in field APTD in F43121. Restrict
records in F43121 to MATC = 2 (voucher) or 3 (voucher reversal). Thus F0411
and F43121 have corresponding records, for each line of voucher. Match
between F0411 and F43121 is by fields DOC doc number and SFX voucher line
number.

Dave Mallory Denver Water
 

DSauve

Legendary Poster
Dave,

I tried looking at the F0411 file, but found that in vouchering multiple PO lines, the F43121 APTD amounts were combined into one AG amount in the F0411 file. I might get 2 lines in the F0411 if some of the PO lines were taxable and some non-taxable, but that's about the best I could get. Am I missing something else here? Maybe we have a processing option set to consolidate entries in the F0411 -- I haven't researched that yet, but it's possible. Thank you for your replies, Dave.


Don Sauve
Wagstaff, Inc.
OW XE, SP15.1, HP-UX 11.0, Oracle 8.1.6
 

david_mallory

Well Known Member
Don,

There is a processing option in P4314, the program which P0411 calls when
you do voucher match, tab Summarization, option 1 "A/P: Blank = do not
summarize, 1 = summarize" which I think is responsible for the
non-summarized/summarized records in F0411. Ours is set to "blank" = do not
summarize. I recommend setting it to "blank" so you can see what is
happening in F0411.

There is also an option below this one for the same choice for the writing
of records to F0911 general ledger. We have that one set to blank also,
which I think is useful now and then for debugging.

Dave Mallory
 

DSauve

Legendary Poster
Re: RE: F43121 Corruption of APTD values

Dave,

I found these processing options, just as you described them. Thanks for your replies and assistance.

Don Sauve
Wagstaff, Inc.
OW XE, SP15.1, HP-UX 11.0, Oracle 8.1.6
 

david_mallory

Well Known Member
RE: RE: F43121 Corruption of APTD values

Yes. We copied field AG (voucher $$ amount) in F0411 voucher file for the
corresponding record in F43121. Also, for the F43121 record where there was
no voucher yet done, thus no record in F0411, we put a -0- in APTD in
F43121. Key between F43121 and F0411 is DOCO order number and LNID order
line number. Can have more than 1 record in F43121 for a record in F4311
orders, such as when receive partial shipments, and vouch the receipts
separately, because vendor invoices separately for each shipment.

I am talking about F43121 records where MATC=2 or 4, thus a voucher record
(or reversal), not a receipt record where MATC=1 or 3.

We had a consultant from JDE named Maureen Kajiwara write the program. If
you want the code I can go hunt it up. We fixed one record at a time, as the
AP folks found receipts they could not vouch. We are now looking at finding
all the other messed-up records and fixing them.

We also found problems in F43121 with fields AOPN, UOPN, UREC, AVCO and
VARC.

Dave Mallory Denver Water The above problem happened while using OW
7332 SP 15.1.
 
Top