Missing IC Transactions

[KevinMc13]

We are having an issue with WO completions on some orders where I can see the IC transaction in the Cardex, but not in F0911. Does anyone having any thoughts as to what might be causing this or where we should dig further?

 

[aaro]

Did you run Mfg Accounting ( R31802A ) for the WO in question ? R31802A is supposed to process unaccounted values from CTS fields and generate GL entries.

Thanks
aaro

 

[rogerwilkouk]

We have been having this issue as well, however our completions are processed in via DSI (as opposed to directly into JDE) so I don't know if this will be the same resolution.
What we found is that when you run Manufacturing Accounting, there is a time lapse between when it grabs it's record (and therefore the Qty to process) via the data seleciton and when it reserves that record to process it. Due to the high volume DSI was processing there were instances where a completion was being recorded after the QTY was grabbed for processing and before it was reserved, which led to the wrong QTY being processed (and therefore missing some Completions).
We proved this using Debug and pausing the program after the record was grabbed but not yet reserved and found there was indeed a possibility for this to happen.
As a temporary solution we halted DSI processing while manufacturing accounting was running but we are also modifying manuafcturing accounting so that after the record is reserved, it revalidates the QTY to be processed (and doesn't just rely on what it initially grabbed.
All our testing so far shows it works.
FYI, Oracle said it wasn't their problem as it could only be duplicated using high volume like DSI or by pausing the program usign Debug so it's DSI's fault. Go Figure!

 

[sharma_abhi85]

Hi,

Greetings.
With reference to the above post. How did you solved the problem, if you are suing the DSI for WO COmpleteion. If Halting DSI Process is not the solution then how did you solved it. What did you modifed in Manufacturing Accounting to revalidate the quantity after record is reserved. Did it worked in real time? If Yes what was the modification in R31802A.

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks.