R42995 - Please shed some light

peterban

peterban

Reputable Poster
Hi Guys!
Well I'm having some fun with this program and I wonder if any of you have been through the same.
Basic problem is that the line of business customer file does not agree to the open orders and is causing problems within credt checking.
Hence we are running R42995 to try and fix it.
Client is on update 5 SQL200.

Ran with no data sequencing but update order headers and LoB - r42995 didnt update correctly
Ran with data sequencing by AN8, KCOO same PO's with same sort of result.

When I say the numbers are out - they are a lot out not just rounding.

I know there are issues with held orders and currency but I've eliminated them as a potential cause.

Any thoughts or inspiration would be appreciated.

Best regards

Peter
 
Hi Guys!
I just found the answer to my little problem and Im absolutely astounded by it...
Inside the R42995 program there is a BF which updates LoB and customer records. This CHECKS the CATEGORY codes for accuracy and if they are not right it DOES NOT update the open order amount. I am not sure if this effects other updates also as our problem was particular to the credit check area using LoB.

This is a little gem - thank you JDE for making my life so interesting....!

I hope this may help some of you, who may have issues around this area.

Best regards

Peter Bannister
 
Peter, could you please explain what you mean by checking the cat codes? Are these the cat codes on the address book? Or on the orders themselves? I too have been struggling with credit for years. My problem now is that I can't get the open orders on the main credit screen to populate with the correct #. Maybe this is my problem too!

Thanks

Karin
 
Thanks for the heads up. I shall try it and see if it works.

Karin





peterban <[email protected]>@jdelist.com on 05/01/2003 12:25:38
PM

Please respond to [email protected]

Sent by: [email protected]


To: [email protected]
cc:

Subject: Re: R42995 - Please shed some light


peterban replied to your post at the site: .
http://www.jdelist.com/ubb/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=Apps&Number=54090

Karen,
I just wrote a tip/trick for Andy Klee on this whole issue and am trying
to pull a white paper together for the larger picture. Take a look at
www.JDEtips.com/TipOfTheWeek.asp
I hope this helps.

Best regards

Peter





Prod: OneWorld Xe Update 3 SP17
Oracle 8.0.6, RS6000, AIX 4.2, Win 95/98, WTS, HTML clients
 
Karin,
yes sorry - its specifically to do with the cat codes on the F03012 or F0301 - if one of the UDC values has been deleted from the table but still used by a customer - R42995 will not update the record as the MBF checks all the fields for correctness.

Sorry if it wasnt clear

Best regards

Peter
 
I am reading this post too late to be able to view the tip on JDEtips.com, could you please post what you wrote there into this discussiong thread? We are also having problems with the Open Order Amoung for Credit checking.
Thank you.
 
Be delighted to--!

Uh Oh, Order Totals Are Wrong!

This week's free tip of the week is brought to you courtesy of Peter
Bannister, an independent JD Edwards consultant based in the UK. Reach
Peter at [email protected]. Peter has spent 8 years implementing
JDE World and OneWorld for both end users and business partners within
Europe. Although he has a rich understanding of most of the ERP suite within
JDE, and a broad appreciation of the complementary products, he specialises
in distribution. He is currently on site at a large multi-national as a
finance/distribution consultant.

So you have looked at the credit check (P42050) for a customer and the order
totals look wrong – what do you do? Well the first thing is to understand
what you are looking at--

JDE allows credit checking at Parent, Customer and Line of Business, a
Knowledge Garden Document by JD Edwards (reference ODS-01-0094) goes some
way towards explaining how this should all work, this tip/trick gives some
pointers on what to do when it doesn’t.

Where do the credit check Amount Due and Order Totals come from?

The Amount Due comes from the total of the open amounts on the Accounts
Receivable detail file (F03B11 for those on OneWorld or F0311 for those on
World). The order total however comes from the F03012 (customer by Line of
Business) or the F0301, depending whether advanced Accounts Receivable is
being used or not.
It’s pretty certain that the Accounts Receivable figure is always going to
be correct but in a lot of circumstances the order total (APRC from the
above files) can get corrupted.

So how can I validate what the number should be?

Take a look at the sales order detail (F4211) file and look for orders that
are open e.g. less than next status 999. Take out all blanket orders, quote
orders, store/forward orders, held lines and all kit component lines.
Remember to take account of those lines that are back ordered. Convert the
extended value you get to the currency of the address book values (APRC),
using the order/transaction date as a basis for the exchange rate, and
total. This should be your baseline value by either customer or customer
and company depending whether you are using advanced accounts receivable or
not.

So the Open Order Values still don’t agree...what next?

The next step would be to run the program R42995 (Repost Active Sales
Orders) but there are some features of this program than people need to be
aware of. These are:
i) It has some hard coded logic internal to the program
which means that if you are using Advanced Accounts Receivable (e.g.
customers by company) then you need to create a version per company you want
to rebuild.

ii) Held orders “may not” be considered correctly. At the
time of writing this there are calls outstanding on the “inclusion” of held
order (see call 6437001)

iii) Some “foreign” orders miss some of the logic as
described in the validation section. Again there are calls for this (see
call 6446468)

iv) Some “foreign” orders still select status 999 orders, but
selections can be used to exclude these.

v) Zero the APRC field in the relevant file (F0301 or
F03012) before running R42995, this is similar to an existing tip for the
commitments (F41021) since if there are no open sales lines (lines at status
< 999) the open order totals will not be affected. Alternatively, the
suggestion from JDE is that a dummy sales line (at zero price!) is entered
before the run so there is a line at a status less than 999. This dummy
order would be cancelled after the R42995 has run. This second approach is
rather cumbersome but does not use any technical tools!

vi) Create versions for the update of Order Total separate to
any commitment update. Updating the order header and customer totals in the
same version are OK.

vii) Check security. The person who submits this job has to
have access to all the data.

viii) Make sure that all data on the customer master is correct,
as the R42995 checks to see of all data is correct before it updates the
customer record. If only one value is incorrect (albeit just the category
code) IT WILL NOT UPDATE the customer record with the new order totals. To
give a concrete example; if a UDC code from 01/03 (the UDC behind AC03) is
deleted with customers still having this assigned then R42995 will not
update the customer record with the recalculated value. This is true for
OneWorld only and is valid at update 5.

ix) There are rounding errors in the R42995 – so if you get
within a reasonable order of magnitude, don’t beat yourself up about it!!
These are all the circumstances the author is aware of at the time of
writing this, but the two last thoughts are to check the Knowledge Garden
and report the problem stating that you have walked through the above.

Good luck!

Andy Klee
www.JDEtips.com



Andy Klee
www.JDETips.com
 
Re: RE: R42995 - Please shed some light

Andy,
Have you ever heard of any issues regarding the clearing of the AIAPRC field on the Customer Master (Line of Bus). I know it is suggested per the response, and I believe I need to do the same. Just curious if you have ever heard of a detrimental result of doing a nonJDE standard clearing of that field ??

Thanks,
Rick Wilson
Andrews Consulting group
 
Re: RE: R42995 - Please shed some light

Hi Rick!

I wrote the article for Andy and can confirm that if this is done in a controlled manner - e.g. users off the system - there should be absolutely no problem at all.

Please note some of the current O/S issues on the KG about this area though.

What sort of issues (and for what release) are you seeing?

Regards

Peter
 
Re: RE: R42995 - Please shed some light
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 
Re: RE: R42995 - Please shed some light

Can you repost your comments/question !

Thanks Peter
 
Re: RE: R42995 - Please shed some light

All,
Thanks for this-it's gonna help us track down the last of the "credit info not right" issue. One question: it's my understanding that the only reason OW goes to the F03012 is if you have the OneWorld A/R - Line of Business selection under the Enhance A/R screen. Am I correct? If it's not selected, your installation of OW will go to the F0301, right?

Thanks in advance for the help.

OW, B7333,
 
Re: RE: R42995 - Please shed some light

Hi Annie,
yes you are correct - if you do not use Advanced AR then you are back in the usual F0301 situation.

Note that OW does update both with certain information e.g. if you are on a LOB install then the F0301 is updated and vica versa - I have not got to the bottom of why.

Warm regards

Peter
 
Re: RE: R42995 - Please shed some light

I honestly don't know if that's the case or not... I think you are right it
uses the F03012 only if the A/R line of business selection is turned on, but
I think it populates both files regardless of whether it's used or not...
and I believe some of the A/B - A/R Screen set up use the F03012 exclusively
.... thanks, Bobby


Thanks for this-it's gonna help us track down the last of the "credit info
not right" issue. One question: it's my understanding that the only reason
OW goes to the F03012 is if you have the OneWorld A/R - Line of Business
selection under the Enhance A/R screen. Am I correct? If it's not
selected, your installation of OW will go to the F0301, right?

Thanks in advance for the help.

OW, B7333,

_________________________________________________________________
Concerned that messages may bounce because your Hotmail account is over
limit? Get Hotmail Extra Storage! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
 
Re: RE: R42995 - Please shed some light

I see that it has been a while since anyone replied to this post. My company has the same issue described here. Can anyone reply back if any of these suggestions worked? Also, does it check all UDC table values to make sure they are good or just the Cat. code UDC table values? Thanks!
 
Re: RE: R42995 - Please shed some light

Hi deancass2000,

there is at least 2 more threads on R42995 and Im sure that they may well contain some info for you !

Also one of them has a link to the article I wrote on this area .... its a bit of a mine field realy
frown.gif


In terms of the UDC checking ..... its at the BF level so when its updating the amounts back into F03xxx if a value is invalid - it just doesnt update the values .... Duh JDE/PSFT/ORCL.... So in answer is ANY value doesnt pass validation due to people taking out the UDC entry then no credit values are updated.

I hope this helps!

Warm regards

Peter
 
Back
Top