Traipsing through the data

Jack_Crouch

Well Known Member
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C045D5.CB0A14C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"

Great. Friday afternoon and yet another use trashes all our purchase
orders by running R43500 incorrectly.

Share my pain.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C045D5.CB0A14C0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2651.67">
<TITLE>Traipsing through the data</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<P ALIGN=3DLEFT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">Great. Friday afternoon and yet another use =
trash</FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">es all our =
purchase orders by running R43500 incorrectly.</FONT></P>

<P ALIGN=3DLEFT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Share =
my pain.</FONT></P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C045D5.CB0A14C0--
 
RE: Traipsing through the data trashed PO\'s

Jack,

Re trashed PO's via R43500: What are users doing with R43500 that trashes
the PO's? What is happening with the records? I imagine we have same
exposure. Have not seen problems, yet. I think.

Dave Mallory Denver Water
 
Re: Traipsing through the data trashed PO\'s

Not sure what exactly (yet). All I know is that all the status changed on F4311 for all open POs.

It is actually R5543500, so it could be some clever modification of ours that is the problem.

I don't really know what or how R43500 is supposed to work. I just clean out the pipes in situations like this.
 
Re: Traipsing through the data trashed PO\'s

B733.1, SP11.3, HP-UX v11.0, Oracle 8.0.5

We had a similar type scenario happen to us many months ago, and found
that if a user runs Purchase Order Print (R43500), and leaves data
selection wide open, along with processing options that allow a next status
that is too high. We have created specific versions of R43500 to do a
print with update, as well as a print without update. The version for
"print with update" has its processing options set to restrict printing to
include only lines at status 280 (from 280 to 280). We also have set up
processing option security on R43500 so that end users can prompt for
versions, but NOT prompt for values.

If you keep the R43500xxx.pdf file that was run in error, that should list
all the PO's that were affected. Good luck!

Don Sauve
Wagstaff, Inc.
e-mail: [email protected]






Jack_Crouch
<[email protected] To: [email protected]
m> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: Traipsing through the data trashed
owner-jdelistml@j PO's ~~452:459
delist.com


11/03/00 01:56 PM
Please respond to
jdelist






Not sure what exactly (yet). All I know is that all the status changed on
F4311 for all open POs.

It is actually R5543500, so it could be some clever modification of ours
that is the problem.

I don't really know what or how R43500 is supposed to work. I just clean
out the pipes in situations like this.


--------------------------
Visit the forum to view this thread at:
http://198.144.193.139/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showflat.pl?Cat=0&Board=OW&Number=459

*************************************************************
This is the JDEList One World Mailing List.
Archives and information on how to SUBSCRIBE, and
UNSUBSCRIBE can be found at http://www.JDELIST.com
*************************************************************
 
RE: Traipsing through the data trashed PO\'s

R43500, print PO, normally updates the status code. One would normally print
one PO or a small range at a time. Maybe somebody is being careless with
data selection and rounding up all the open PO's in the corral and
"printing" them and the status codes update. We DID see that in early
testing and training. Might want to have your applications person or
Purchasing lead person look at that possibility. Maybe want applications
person to set up a processing option to say "what PO do you want to print?"
and give them a box to key PO number into, and take away data selection. We
modified R43500 also, to make PO look like what we wanted. Or could be a
bug or who knows. Also, knowing what the status codes changed to, and if all
went to same status, might give clues.
 
Re: Traipsing through the data trashed PO\'s

My users did the same thing with the P43510 - Print Purchase reciever. They
pushed all order forwards a couple of status by running it with the incorrect
data selection. It's now secured down so they cannot do this. There are other
simular jobs in sales orders. We had to fix over 1,000 POs.

JDE identifys these as "simple reports" in the OL, but they really should id
these as a batch update to seperate them from true simple reports.

sue



|--------+----------------------->
| | DSauve |
| | <DSauve@wagst|
| | aff.com> |
| | |
| | 11/03/2000 |
| | 02:25 PM |
| | Please |
| | respond to |
| | jdelist |
| | |
|--------+----------------------->
>---------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| To: [email protected] |
| cc: (bcc: Susan Pranes/Inhale) |
| Subject: Re: Traipsing through the data |
| trashed PO's ~~452:461 |
>---------------------------------------------------------|





B733.1, SP11.3, HP-UX v11.0, Oracle 8.0.5

We had a similar type scenario happen to us many months ago, and found
that if a user runs Purchase Order Print (R43500), and leaves data
selection wide open, along with processing options that allow a next status
that is too high. We have created specific versions of R43500 to do a
print with update, as well as a print without update. The version for
"print with update" has its processing options set to restrict printing to
include only lines at status 280 (from 280 to 280). We also have set up
processing option security on R43500 so that end users can prompt for
versions, but NOT prompt for values.

If you keep the R43500xxx.pdf file that was run in error, that should list
all the PO's that were affected. Good luck!

Don Sauve
Wagstaff, Inc.
e-mail: [email protected]






Jack_Crouch

<[email protected] To: [email protected]

m> cc:

Sent by: Subject: Re: Traipsing through
the data trashed
owner-jdelistml@j PO's ~~452:459

delist.com



11/03/00 01:56 PM

Please respond to

jdelist







Not sure what exactly (yet). All I know is that all the status changed on
F4311 for all open POs.

It is actually R5543500, so it could be some clever modification of ours
that is the problem.

I don't really know what or how R43500 is supposed to work. I just clean
out the pipes in situations like this.


--------------------------
Visit the forum to view this thread at:
http://198.144.193.139/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showflat.pl?Cat=0&Board=OW&Number=459

*************************************************************
This is the JDEList One World Mailing List.
Archives and information on how to SUBSCRIBE, and
UNSUBSCRIBE can be found at http://www.JDELIST.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=461
*************************************************************
This is the JDEList One World Mailing List.
Archives and information on how to SUBSCRIBE, and
UNSUBSCRIBE can be found at http://www.JDELIST.com
*************************************************************
 
RE: Traipsing through the data trashed PO\'s

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C0467D.3045A1E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"

This is exactly what has happened. It has also happened with R42800.
It has also happened with some UBE that updated all W/O statuses. It also
happened with some UBE that superceded (or whatever the term is) every
single part in all Bills of Materials (the cleanup there was a bit more
complicated than the status situations).

Life is too short for this crap. And as we roll out to more and more
locations... geeez.

So, I think we begin a project to do as you describe here. Thanks for the
ideas.
 
RE: Traipsing through the data - trashed PO\'s

I second that, re update programs (called "reports" by JDE) versus
read-the-data-reports. Yes, this is another sore point which JDE should
change. It makes no sense to call an update program a "report". You have
to hunt down those "reports" that update files and secure them differently.
We have run into this trouble spot several times.
 
Back
Top