PO Suggestions Blank Title 66597

Yahoo Archive
21
Hi all,
I am stumped with this one....I could not find anything on this issue. Vantage 8.03.408B
Manual PO creates Supplier Qty of 4.25 EA and our Qty of 612 IN - which is correct according to the Factor of 144 and the Direction of PUR->INV.

When I Generate PO Suggestions - it shows 612 EA in both Our Quantity and Supplier Quantity fields, which is the INV-BY quantity, but the PUR-BY unit of measure. If I create the PO without modifying any fields, it matches the suggestion.

This could have been real ugly because this particular item is quite expensive. Has anyone seen this before and am I missing something?


Sincerely,


Stephen Schaefer
Abrams AirborneÂ

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
22
Old problem (impacts new PO suggestions & manually created PO lines).

We've held on 405a but are testing 409a to see if finally resolved.

Sporadic problem (that can really screw up inventory).

We're resigned to training all to verify UMs and factors are correct before approving. Helps a lot but some can still slip through.

My sympathies.

Rob

--- Original Message ---
From:"Stephen Schaefer" <sschaefer323@...>
Sent:Wed 3/31/10 8:47 pm
To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subj:[Vantage] PO Suggestions

Hi all,
I am stumped with this one....I could not find anything on this issue. Vantage 8.03.408B
Manual PO creates Supplier Qty of 4.25 EA and our Qty of 612 IN - which is correct according to the Factor of 144 and the Direction of PUR->INV.

When I Generate PO Suggestions - it shows 612 EA in both Our Quantity and Supplier Quantity fields, which is the INV-BY quantity, but the PUR-BY unit of measure. If I create the PO without modifying any fields, it matches the suggestion.

This could have been real ugly because this particular item is quite expensive. Has anyone seen this before and am I missing something?


Sincerely,


Stephen Schaefer
Abrams AirborneÂ

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
23
Thanks Rob. I had not heard about this previously. My Buyers did confirm that it does not happen all of the time.
Hopefully it's fixed in 409A. That would be nice - lately the answer seems to be "fixed in E9, not in Vantage."

 Sincerely,


Stephen Schaefer
Abrams Airborne

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
24
All,
As this is the most imaginative group around, I come to you with a quandry. We are moving from a 90% customized legacy system to E9. In the legacy system, everything is jumbled together- new PO requests, changes, parts, plants, and companies. (You can see why we have to do something.) Our planner wants the same functionality in E9- all companies, plants, suggestions on one screen, with ability to generate new Po's or accept changes where applicable. I can get us as far as having one form with both new and change suggestions, though in separate sections, and this has been declared not good enough.
Any design assistance would be greatly appreciated...
Thanks!
- leAnn
25
LeAnn,



You can always tell your planner he can get that functionality in the legacy
system.



Hope that helps!! (but I doubt it does)



Kevin



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
leann_37
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 4:33 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions





All,
As this is the most imaginative group around, I come to you with a quandry.
We are moving from a 90% customized legacy system to E9. In the legacy
system, everything is jumbled together- new PO requests, changes, parts,
plants, and companies. (You can see why we have to do something.) Our
planner wants the same functionality in E9- all companies, plants,
suggestions on one screen, with ability to generate new Po's or accept
changes where applicable. I can get us as far as having one form with both
new and change suggestions, though in separate sections, and this has been
declared not good enough.
Any design assistance would be greatly appreciated...
Thanks!
- leAnn





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
26
I have a question regarding the behaviour of the PO form in Vantage.

I recently implemented a customisation which, when the user creates a new PO from scratch, uses an AfterFieldChange event to interrogate the Part table for the part number entered into the PO. If it finds a match it returns the contents of a UD field from the Part table into a UD field in the PO. This works.

However, I have now been asked to implement this same functionality to trigger when a PO is raised via PO Suggestions and its this that is causing me some real problems.
I have tried various events and each one seems to cause differing errors - EpiViewNotification causes the users authorisation to disappear; the AfterAdapterMethod doesn't fire at all (I have it linked to the PO Adapter) and the BeforeAdapterMethod just throws an exception.

Can anyone suggest where I'm going wrong ?

Thanks

BM
27
Bill,



I found this problem to be particularly vexing. Basically, you can build a
BPM that fires on the method that generates suggestions. The problem there
is the method doesn't expose you to the PO numbers it created. The only way
I've found around that is to save the last PO number on file pre-processing,
then find the last PO number on file post-processing, and that gives you
which PO's were generated. Then, you would have a post-processing 4GL
directive that reads through those PO's and performs your updates. You
could do this by utilizing a field on a static table (such as
Company.Number01), or use the BPM call context parameters to pass the number
from pre-processing to post-processing directives.



It's quite a bit complicated to try to put into an email, contact me offline
if you want to discuss further.



Kevin Simon

ksimon@...





From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Bill
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 12:03 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions





I have a question regarding the behaviour of the PO form in Vantage.

I recently implemented a customisation which, when the user creates a new PO
from scratch, uses an AfterFieldChange event to interrogate the Part table
for the part number entered into the PO. If it finds a match it returns the
contents of a UD field from the Part table into a UD field in the PO. This
works.

However, I have now been asked to implement this same functionality to
trigger when a PO is raised via PO Suggestions and its this that is causing
me some real problems.
I have tried various events and each one seems to cause differing errors -
EpiViewNotification causes the users authorisation to disappear; the
AfterAdapterMethod doesn't fire at all (I have it linked to the PO Adapter)
and the BeforeAdapterMethod just throws an exception.

Can anyone suggest where I'm going wrong ?

Thanks

BM





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
28
E9.04.507A SQL

Is there a way to break into the Generate PO from PO Suggestions process? My purchasing guy wants to put a Promise Date on the New PO Suggestion screen and have that populate on the PO Release that gets created. I haven't tried going through the ttCallContextBPMData process yet, but nothing happens on the PORel Data Directive (I can't get anything to occur on an In-Transaction directive when the record is created via Generate).

We're also upgrading to 9.05.702A in a couple of weeks, so if it works in 9.05, I can have him wait.

Thanks,

Ernie Lowell
Diba Industries
29
You can use a BPM and enable one of the user defined Date fields in PO Suggestions.

We use the BO POSugg.Generate to transfer some user defined data to the PO line.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth" <gracefulthreads@...> wrote:
>
> E9.04.507A SQL
>
> Is there a way to break into the Generate PO from PO Suggestions process? My purchasing guy wants to put a Promise Date on the New PO Suggestion screen and have that populate on the PO Release that gets created. I haven't tried going through the ttCallContextBPMData process yet, but nothing happens on the PORel Data Directive (I can't get anything to occur on an In-Transaction directive when the record is created via Generate).
>
> We're also upgrading to 9.05.702A in a couple of weeks, so if it works in 9.05, I can have him wait.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ernie Lowell
> Diba Industries
>