• 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!

Fwd: Question for You

JOHNA

Member
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:23:56 -0700
From: John Alexander <JOHNA@burpee.com>
Subject: Question for You
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
PP-Warning: No Recipient fields - To/Cc/Bcc field required;
BCC added at mail2.wise.net
Bcc:

I would like to add audit info to an existing jdedwards file 'F0117 ' if I =
go into table design and add the columns needed, how can I make sure they =
are included in the file without doing a GEN for the file which will =
destroy all existing data???????

Thanks in advance.
=
=
=
=
=
=
=20
 

vbojan

Well Known Member
Hi John,

I don't think is a good idea to change any JDE table. Record description will be changed (include file for that table) and you need to rebuild every object referring to “F0117.h” file. Try to build new table “F550117.h” with primary index same as “F0117” and add additional fields you need. It is easy to mange additional table trough table I/O or trough TER.

Hope this helps.

Regards,
Bojan.

Bojan Vukicevic,
Sr. programmer analyst
Serrot International Inc.
 

michelle_perrin

Active Member
RE: Question for You

Changing existing OW files is not advisable!

Your best bet is to create a tag file (eg: F0117A) that includes the columns
that you want, then create a business view that links the two files
together.

Also you can not include new columns in a table without re-generating the
table. Yes it will destroy all of the data, therefore you must copy/save
the data, regen the file then copy the data back.

Michelle Perrin
 

owguru

Well Known Member
I have to echo everything Bojan said! The immediate rammifications of
modifying JDE tables can be overwhelming. And upgrades require a repeat of
the whole thing...not something I would ever want my customers to go
through.

...for those of you who dislike people on soapboxes, please stop reading
now...I just have to get this out and hope a few of you will find it
helpful, or better yet, add to it!

Remember that first day of class when the instructor introduced the
"flexibility" and "agility" of OneWorld and the toolset...the "active" data
dictionary and "modless mods"? We were supposed to be overwhelmed at the
possibility of making one little change in the data dictionary that could
affect the entire system...How scary is that!

My general rule is that this is all great, but there is a hierarchy to all
these objects. The lower objects (data dictionary items) lead to higher
objects (tables, then business views, then applications and business
functions). When making a change, the lower the object, the more damage you
can do across the system. There are times when changes to dd items are
appropriate, very few. For tables, I live by the tag file rule (use them!).
I almost always create my own business views...their simple fast and don't
take up any space. And any modifications within an application should be as
non-intrusive to the JDE code as possible when you have a choice.

I would strongly recommend studying a couple of things:

1- JDE's modification rules on what an upgrade preserves. For those of you
who think this is only about upgrades (and you'll be long gone by then,
right?), think again. With all the ESU's flying around these days that use
basically the same merge programs, you can get caught pretty easily making
poor design choices in your modifications...gives us consultants a really
bad name :(

2- Look into the methodologies behind localization development. They do
some pretty cool things to keep their mods from being affected by the spec
merge process...pulling as much functionality as possible out of ER and into
NERs with a single call inside the application, etc.

Bottom line, OneWorld is a beast...modifications make it worse. Anything I
can do as a developer to ease the pain is important, and I know my customers
appreciate it even if they don't realize during all the chaos of an
implementation.

thanks for letting me blow off a little steam :)


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
 
G

Guest

Guest
RE: Question for You

Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 12:05:31 -0800 (PST)
From: michelle perrin <michelle.perrin@wel.co.nz>
Reply-to: jdelist@jdelist.com
Subject: RE: Question for You ~~1087:1094

Changing existing OW files is not advisable!

Your best bet is to create a tag file (eg: F0117A) that
includes the columns
that you want, then create a business view that links
the two files
together.

Also you can not include new columns in a table without
re-generating the
table. Yes it will destroy all of the data, therefore
you must copy/save
the data, regen the file then copy the data back.

Michelle Perrin




--------------------------
To view this thread, visit the JDEList forum at:
http://198.144.193.139/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showflat.pl?Ca
t=0&Board=OW&Number=1094


----- End forwarded message -----
 
I'd second that.

We had a consultant who changed a field length in F0101 - from length 20 to
40 I recall. It took us about 6 months to work out why packages weren't
building properly.

Will
 
G

Guest

Guest
Guru,

I agree 100% with your soapbox statements but let me reduce it a little bit
for the audience:
"Don't believe anything you were told during the sales cycle re OneWorld's
low cost of maintenance"

{:)
------------------------------------------------
Larry Jones
I.T. White Knight
Wagstaff, Inc., Spokane, WA USA
509.922.1404 x3266
ljones@wagstaff.com
ERP:  JDE OneWorld B733.1, SP 11.3
Tech: HPUX 11, Oracle 8.0.5, NT4/Win2K
------------------------------------------------



owguru
<owguru@hotmail.c To: jdelistml@jdelist.com
om> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: Fwd: Question for You ~~1087:1110
owner-jdelistml@j
delist.com


11/14/2000 03:27
PM
Please respond to
jdelist





I have to echo everything Bojan said! The immediate rammifications of
modifying JDE tables can be overwhelming. And upgrades require a repeat of

the whole thing...not something I would ever want my customers to go
through.

...for those of you who dislike people on soapboxes, please stop reading
now...I just have to get this out and hope a few of you will find it
helpful, or better yet, add to it!

Remember that first day of class when the instructor introduced the
"flexibility" and "agility" of OneWorld and the toolset...the "active" data

dictionary and "modless mods"? We were supposed to be overwhelmed at the
possibility of making one little change in the data dictionary that could
affect the entire system...How scary is that!

My general rule is that this is all great, but there is a hierarchy to all
these objects. The lower objects (data dictionary items) lead to higher
objects (tables, then business views, then applications and business
functions). When making a change, the lower the object, the more damage
you
can do across the system. There are times when changes to dd items are
appropriate, very few. For tables, I live by the tag file rule (use
them!).
I almost always create my own business views...their simple fast and don't
take up any space. And any modifications within an application should be
as
non-intrusive to the JDE code as possible when you have a choice.

I would strongly recommend studying a couple of things:

1- JDE's modification rules on what an upgrade preserves. For those of you

who think this is only about upgrades (and you'll be long gone by then,
right?), think again. With all the ESU's flying around these days that use

basically the same merge programs, you can get caught pretty easily making
poor design choices in your modifications...gives us consultants a really
bad name :(

2- Look into the methodologies behind localization development. They do
some pretty cool things to keep their mods from being affected by the spec
merge process...pulling as much functionality as possible out of ER and
into
NERs with a single call inside the application, etc.

Bottom line, OneWorld is a beast...modifications make it worse. Anything I

can do as a developer to ease the pain is important, and I know my
customers
appreciate it even if they don't realize during all the chaos of an
implementation.

thanks for letting me blow off a little steam :)


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.




--------------------------
To view this thread, visit the JDEList forum at:
http://198.144.193.139/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showflat.pl?Cat=0&Board=OW&Number=1110

*************************************************************
This is the JDEList One World / XE Mailing List.
Archives and information on how to SUBSCRIBE, and
UNSUBSCRIBE can be found at http://www.JDELIST.com
*************************************************************







Larry Jones
ljones@wagstaff.com
OneWorld B733.1, SP 11.3
HPUX 11.0, Oracle SE 8.0.5
 

Chad_Anderson

Active Member
You Da MAN!!! (Or woman) owquru really doesn't sound
gender specific.

=====
Chad Anderson
JD Edwards OneWorld Advisor/Firefighter
Generac Portable Products L.L.C.

OneWorld B733.1 SP 7.1
AS/400 Enterprise Server
Windows NT SQL 7.0 Deployment Server

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays!
http://calendar.yahoo.com/



Chad Anderson
Generac Portable Products L.L.C.
 
Top