Part No Change Blank Title 112938

Hi Danial,

I worked on a project for switching from significant to non-significant part numbering. They were causing all kinds of problems.

We didn't try to convert the old numbers. Instead, we just implemented a policy of using non-significant, sequential numbers for all new parts and specified rules for descriptions and codes.

Users quickly learned how to use the fields that are available in the software to code, describe and locate parts.

There are still plenty of live parts with the old significant part numbers but they are just numbers.



--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "daniel_hunter1980" <dh.danielhunter@...> wrote:
>
> The intended goal here was the evaluation of a new part numbering system. The company myself and Grant work for use a semi-intelligent part numbering system which is flawed.
>
> For example the first two digits were to represent the current year. To this day the company still uses '08'!
>
> We then have a part classification within the part number. This sometimes can change through the parts lifecycle, or can often be setup incorrectly. The work for all departments to update all relevant paperwork for this change is staggering.
>
> Hence we are both interested in the possibility of moving to a non-significant part number but respect the impact this will have across the business. So as part of this exercise we were wanting to know what effect / what work could be done to preserve data such as purchasing history within purchase advisor etc and also inventory history contained with 'part transaction history'.
>
> All this data is used within the business to a degree. So departments such as purchasing and our stores may be resistant to the change because of this very reason, hence we were exploring avenues where this data could be pulled across to a 'new' part number. Or other methods / workarounds which can make this process easier for all concerned to perform / work with.
>
> Regards
>
>
> Daniel
> Design Engineer
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "that_guyy" <rbird@> wrote:
> >
> > I agree with Jose, not recommended, it's just a Part Number.
> > If you must maintain integrity of the part number history, but you'd rather type a different part number instead of say a lengthy part number, you could use Internal Part Cross Reference in Epicor 9.
> > But this is just a cross reference, it doesn't change the part number and you don't inactivate the part number.
> > The other option is what Jose described, but that does not preserve the part history integrity.
> > I am curious what your intended goal is.
> >
> > -Rick Bird
> > IT Software Administrator
> > Rowmark, LLC.
> >
> > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Jose Gomez <jose@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is definately not something that should be done , nor is it supported.
> > >
> > > If its just a part in your system which ou've never bought, sold, received
> > > etc.. Then its no big deal, but if you've used it even once, its a
> > > nightmare, unlike Customer which the PrimaryKey is CustNum, in Part the
> > > Primary Key is PartNum (Combined with Company) so this PartNum is spread
> > > all over the system, OrderDtl, ShipDtl, ParTran, PODtl you name it.
> > >
> > > I would hightly discourage you to try this, your best bet, is to make the
> > > current parts innactive and create new ones. You could mark the old ones as
> > > alternates to have some sort of link between the two.
> > >
> > > *Jose C Gomez*
> > > *Software Engineer*
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *T: 904.469.1524 mobile
> > > E: jose@
> > > http://www.josecgomez.com
> > > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez> <http://www.facebook.com/josegomez>
> > > <http://www.google.com/profiles/jose.gomez> <http://www.twitter.com/joc85>
> > > <http://www.josecgomez.com/professional-resume/>
> > > <http://www.josecgomez.com/feed/>
> > > <http://www.usdoingstuff.com>
> > >
> > > *Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?*
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 7:27 AM, leroux_grant <leroux_grant@>wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > Is it possible to change from one part number to another and maintaining
> > > > purchasing and inventory history.
> > > >
> > > > For example - we are looking at changing our part number setup to
> > > > something more generic but need to carry across current part info history
> > > > to avoid confusion where other departments are concerned.
> > > >
> > > > If it is possible, can this task be automated in the form of programming
> > > > to speed up the changeover process?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance.
> > > > Grant
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>
Hi All

Is it possible to change from one part number to another and maintaining purchasing and inventory history.

For example - we are looking at changing our part number setup to something more generic but need to carry across current part info history to avoid confusion where other departments are concerned.

If it is possible, can this task be automated in the form of programming to speed up the changeover process?

Thanks in advance.
Grant
This is definately not something that should be done , nor is it supported.

If its just a part in your system which ou've never bought, sold, received
etc.. Then its no big deal, but if you've used it even once, its a
nightmare, unlike Customer which the PrimaryKey is CustNum, in Part the
Primary Key is PartNum (Combined with Company) so this PartNum is spread
all over the system, OrderDtl, ShipDtl, ParTran, PODtl you name it.

I would hightly discourage you to try this, your best bet, is to make the
current parts innactive and create new ones. You could mark the old ones as
alternates to have some sort of link between the two.

*Jose C Gomez*
*Software Engineer*
*
*
*
*T: 904.469.1524 mobile
E: jose@...
http://www.josecgomez.com
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez> <http://www.facebook.com/josegomez>
<http://www.google.com/profiles/jose.gomez> <http://www.twitter.com/joc85>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/professional-resume/>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/feed/>
<http://www.usdoingstuff.com>

*Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?*



On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 7:27 AM, leroux_grant <leroux_grant@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> Hi All
>
> Is it possible to change from one part number to another and maintaining
> purchasing and inventory history.
>
> For example - we are looking at changing our part number setup to
> something more generic but need to carry across current part info history
> to avoid confusion where other departments are concerned.
>
> If it is possible, can this task be automated in the form of programming
> to speed up the changeover process?
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Grant
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I agree with Jose, not recommended, it's just a Part Number.
If you must maintain integrity of the part number history, but you'd rather type a different part number instead of say a lengthy part number, you could use Internal Part Cross Reference in Epicor 9.
But this is just a cross reference, it doesn't change the part number and you don't inactivate the part number.
The other option is what Jose described, but that does not preserve the part history integrity.
I am curious what your intended goal is.

-Rick Bird
IT Software Administrator
Rowmark, LLC.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Jose Gomez <jose@...> wrote:
>
> This is definately not something that should be done , nor is it supported.
>
> If its just a part in your system which ou've never bought, sold, received
> etc.. Then its no big deal, but if you've used it even once, its a
> nightmare, unlike Customer which the PrimaryKey is CustNum, in Part the
> Primary Key is PartNum (Combined with Company) so this PartNum is spread
> all over the system, OrderDtl, ShipDtl, ParTran, PODtl you name it.
>
> I would hightly discourage you to try this, your best bet, is to make the
> current parts innactive and create new ones. You could mark the old ones as
> alternates to have some sort of link between the two.
>
> *Jose C Gomez*
> *Software Engineer*
> *
> *
> *
> *T: 904.469.1524 mobile
> E: jose@...
> http://www.josecgomez.com
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez> <http://www.facebook.com/josegomez>
> <http://www.google.com/profiles/jose.gomez> <http://www.twitter.com/joc85>
> <http://www.josecgomez.com/professional-resume/>
> <http://www.josecgomez.com/feed/>
> <http://www.usdoingstuff.com>
>
> *Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?*
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 7:27 AM, leroux_grant <leroux_grant@...>wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Hi All
> >
> > Is it possible to change from one part number to another and maintaining
> > purchasing and inventory history.
> >
> > For example - we are looking at changing our part number setup to
> > something more generic but need to carry across current part info history
> > to avoid confusion where other departments are concerned.
> >
> > If it is possible, can this task be automated in the form of programming
> > to speed up the changeover process?
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> > Grant
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Unsubscribe

Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless

-----Original message-----
From: that_guyy <rbird@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, Aug 14, 2012 02:19:20 GMT+00:00
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Part No Change

I agree with Jose, not recommended, it's just a Part Number.
If you must maintain integrity of the part number history, but you'd rather
type a different part number instead of say a lengthy part number, you could
use Internal Part Cross Reference in Epicor 9.
But this is just a cross reference, it doesn't change the part number and
you don't inactivate the part number.
The other option is what Jose described, but that does not preserve the part
history integrity.
I am curious what your intended goal is.

-Rick Bird
IT Software Administrator
Rowmark, LLC.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Jose Gomez <jose@...> wrote:
>
> This is definately not something that should be done , nor is it
supported.
>
> If its just a part in your system which ou've never bought, sold, received
> etc.. Then its no big deal, but if you've used it even once, its a
> nightmare, unlike Customer which the PrimaryKey is CustNum, in Part the
> Primary Key is PartNum (Combined with Company) so this PartNum is spread
> all over the system, OrderDtl, ShipDtl, ParTran, PODtl you name it.
>
> I would hightly discourage you to try this, your best bet, is to make the
> current parts innactive and create new ones. You could mark the old ones
as
> alternates to have some sort of link between the two.
>
> *Jose C Gomez*
> *Software Engineer*
> *
> *
> *
> *T: 904.469.1524 mobile
> E: jose@...
> http://www.josecgomez.com
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez> <http://www.facebook.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The intended goal here was the evaluation of a new part numbering system. The company myself and Grant work for use a semi-intelligent part numbering system which is flawed.

For example the first two digits were to represent the current year. To this day the company still uses '08'!

We then have a part classification within the part number. This sometimes can change through the parts lifecycle, or can often be setup incorrectly. The work for all departments to update all relevant paperwork for this change is staggering.

Hence we are both interested in the possibility of moving to a non-significant part number but respect the impact this will have across the business. So as part of this exercise we were wanting to know what effect / what work could be done to preserve data such as purchasing history within purchase advisor etc and also inventory history contained with 'part transaction history'.

All this data is used within the business to a degree. So departments such as purchasing and our stores may be resistant to the change because of this very reason, hence we were exploring avenues where this data could be pulled across to a 'new' part number. Or other methods / workarounds which can make this process easier for all concerned to perform / work with.

Regards


Daniel
Design Engineer


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "that_guyy" <rbird@...> wrote:
>
> I agree with Jose, not recommended, it's just a Part Number.
> If you must maintain integrity of the part number history, but you'd rather type a different part number instead of say a lengthy part number, you could use Internal Part Cross Reference in Epicor 9.
> But this is just a cross reference, it doesn't change the part number and you don't inactivate the part number.
> The other option is what Jose described, but that does not preserve the part history integrity.
> I am curious what your intended goal is.
>
> -Rick Bird
> IT Software Administrator
> Rowmark, LLC.
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Jose Gomez <jose@> wrote:
> >
> > This is definately not something that should be done , nor is it supported.
> >
> > If its just a part in your system which ou've never bought, sold, received
> > etc.. Then its no big deal, but if you've used it even once, its a
> > nightmare, unlike Customer which the PrimaryKey is CustNum, in Part the
> > Primary Key is PartNum (Combined with Company) so this PartNum is spread
> > all over the system, OrderDtl, ShipDtl, ParTran, PODtl you name it.
> >
> > I would hightly discourage you to try this, your best bet, is to make the
> > current parts innactive and create new ones. You could mark the old ones as
> > alternates to have some sort of link between the two.
> >
> > *Jose C Gomez*
> > *Software Engineer*
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *T: 904.469.1524 mobile
> > E: jose@
> > http://www.josecgomez.com
> > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez> <http://www.facebook.com/josegomez>
> > <http://www.google.com/profiles/jose.gomez> <http://www.twitter.com/joc85>
> > <http://www.josecgomez.com/professional-resume/>
> > <http://www.josecgomez.com/feed/>
> > <http://www.usdoingstuff.com>
> >
> > *Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?*
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 7:27 AM, leroux_grant <leroux_grant@>wrote:
> >
> > > **
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > > Is it possible to change from one part number to another and maintaining
> > > purchasing and inventory history.
> > >
> > > For example - we are looking at changing our part number setup to
> > > something more generic but need to carry across current part info history
> > > to avoid confusion where other departments are concerned.
> > >
> > > If it is possible, can this task be automated in the form of programming
> > > to speed up the changeover process?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance.
> > > Grant
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>