Priority Dispatch Report

If you could post it or send it my way, I would like to take a look at it.

Thank you

Jeff



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Brian W, Spolarich
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 5:35 PM
To: vantage
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Priority Dispatch Report



I have a BAQ and Report that shows basically what¹s available to be worked
in in WIP per area sorted based on Sales Order due date showing stuff that¹s
coming due or overdue first. Our techs use it to figure out ³what I need to
work on first² and its a lot easier to deal with than the stock Priority
Dispatch report.

I can send it/post it if you¹d like.

-bws

On 1/30/09 2:17 PM, "Lynn" <lynn.khalife@...
<mailto:lynn.khalife%40core-mfg.com> > wrote:

>
>
>
> You won't be able to "re-create" the report unless you decide to
> start completely from scratch and build your own BAQ and write a BAQ
> report.
>
> The Priority Dispatch Report is not based on any actual database
> table. It is based on a (temporary) view called JCR65. No one knows
> how the Epicor developers arrive at this view.
>
> This is what you should do:
>
> You can basically know what is in the view by going to the Report
> Data Definitions for PrioDisp. Use the Duplicate Report command in
> the Actions menu to Copy the PrioDisp to a new name. Then click on
> the JCR65 table and then click on the "Excluded Fields" tab. Add any
> additional fields that you want.
>
> Then decide what table (from the Data Dictionary) to get your desired
> field from. Add that table to your PrioDis2 data definition then
> select your desired field(s).
>
> Then, add a New Relationship between the JCR65 and your new table.
> Here's the other part people have trouble with: The drop-downs don't
> seem to work for this data definition. All you need to do to
> overcome this problem is simply to manually type your desired table
> and field names. This will work.
>
> When your linking is properly completed, everything else will work
> just as it normally does when you modify Epicor-provided Crystal
> Reports.
>
> Lynn
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> , "Jeff
> Stockard" <jeff.stockard@...>
> wrote:
>> >
>> > Does anyone know where the Priority Dispatch Report gets the data
> from. My
>> > scheduling agent wants the Job Due date on the Priority Dispatch
> Report but
>> > I don't know how to add this to the Crystal report without re-
> creating the
>> > entire report. Is there an easier way to do this?
>> >
>> > Thank you
>> >
>> > Jeff
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Vantage 8.03.405a



Has anyone seen where the on hand quantities get out of sync between the
PartBin and PartWhse on hand quantity fields?



In my environment I have a warehouse which has one bin so it is easy for
me to notice when this happens. It is noticeable in the part tracker
where the on hand quantities in the Plants sheet and the Warehouses
sheet are the same but differ from the Bins sheet.



I am trying to determine the root cause of this problem.



Kim Kunze



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I think this is probably related to allocation calculations that are
incorrect. They were supposed to have been correct in 8.03.407a but now
are scheduled for .408.



Regards,





Andrew Best

Kice Industries, Inc.

P(316)744-7151

F(316)295-2412



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Kunze, Kim
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:35 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] PartBin and PartWhse on hand qty mismatch



Vantage 8.03.405a

Has anyone seen where the on hand quantities get out of sync between the
PartBin and PartWhse on hand quantity fields?

In my environment I have a warehouse which has one bin so it is easy for
me to notice when this happens. It is noticeable in the part tracker
where the on hand quantities in the Plants sheet and the Warehouses
sheet are the same but differ from the Bins sheet.

I am trying to determine the root cause of this problem.

Kim Kunze

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I believe Conversion 6430 "Recalculate Part Onhand/Allocation
Summaries" will fix this.



--

Brian W. Spolarich ~ Manager, Information Services ~ Advanced Photonix /
Picometrix

bspolarich@... ~ 734-864-5618 ~
www.advancedphotonix.com



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Andrew Best
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 4:38 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] PartBin and PartWhse on hand qty mismatch



I think this is probably related to allocation calculations that are
incorrect. They were supposed to have been correct in 8.03.407a but now
are scheduled for .408.

Regards,

Andrew Best

Kice Industries, Inc.

P(316)744-7151

F(316)295-2412

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
Of Kunze, Kim
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:35 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] PartBin and PartWhse on hand qty mismatch

Vantage 8.03.405a

Has anyone seen where the on hand quantities get out of sync between the
PartBin and PartWhse on hand quantity fields?

In my environment I have a warehouse which has one bin so it is easy for
me to notice when this happens. It is noticeable in the part tracker
where the on hand quantities in the Plants sheet and the Warehouses
sheet are the same but differ from the Bins sheet.

I am trying to determine the root cause of this problem.

Kim Kunze

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
We run conversion 6430 on a monthly basis, and it always finds
several discrepancies. I don't know why Vantage has such a hard time
maintaining the summaries in the PartWhse table.....

Adam

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Brian W. Spolarich "
<bspolarich@...> wrote:
>
> I believe Conversion 6430 "Recalculate Part Onhand/Allocation
> Summaries" will fix this.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Brian W. Spolarich ~ Manager, Information Services ~ Advanced
Photonix /
> Picometrix
>
> bspolarich@... ~ 734-864-5618 ~
> www.advancedphotonix.com
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf
> Of Andrew Best
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 4:38 PM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Vantage] PartBin and PartWhse on hand qty mismatch
>
>
>
> I think this is probably related to allocation calculations that are
> incorrect. They were supposed to have been correct in 8.03.407a but
now
> are scheduled for .408.
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrew Best
>
> Kice Industries, Inc.
>
> P(316)744-7151
>
> F(316)295-2412
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%
40yahoogroups.com> ] On
> Behalf
> Of Kunze, Kim
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:35 PM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Vantage] PartBin and PartWhse on hand qty mismatch
>
> Vantage 8.03.405a
>
> Has anyone seen where the on hand quantities get out of sync
between the
> PartBin and PartWhse on hand quantity fields?
>
> In my environment I have a warehouse which has one bin so it is
easy for
> me to notice when this happens. It is noticeable in the part tracker
> where the on hand quantities in the Plants sheet and the Warehouses
> sheet are the same but differ from the Bins sheet.
>
> I am trying to determine the root cause of this problem.
>
> Kim Kunze
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Does anyone know where the Priority Dispatch Report gets the data from. My
scheduling agent wants the Job Due date on the Priority Dispatch Report but
I don't know how to add this to the Crystal report without re-creating the
entire report. Is there an easier way to do this?

Thank you

Jeff



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
You won't be able to "re-create" the report unless you decide to
start completely from scratch and build your own BAQ and write a BAQ
report.

The Priority Dispatch Report is not based on any actual database
table. It is based on a (temporary) view called JCR65. No one knows
how the Epicor developers arrive at this view.

This is what you should do:

You can basically know what is in the view by going to the Report
Data Definitions for PrioDisp. Use the Duplicate Report command in
the Actions menu to Copy the PrioDisp to a new name. Then click on
the JCR65 table and then click on the "Excluded Fields" tab. Add any
additional fields that you want.

Then decide what table (from the Data Dictionary) to get your desired
field from. Add that table to your PrioDis2 data definition then
select your desired field(s).

Then, add a New Relationship between the JCR65 and your new table.
Here's the other part people have trouble with: The drop-downs don't
seem to work for this data definition. All you need to do to
overcome this problem is simply to manually type your desired table
and field names. This will work.

When your linking is properly completed, everything else will work
just as it normally does when you modify Epicor-provided Crystal
Reports.

Lynn


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Stockard" <jeff.stockard@...>
wrote:
>
> Does anyone know where the Priority Dispatch Report gets the data
from. My
> scheduling agent wants the Job Due date on the Priority Dispatch
Report but
> I don't know how to add this to the Crystal report without re-
creating the
> entire report. Is there an easier way to do this?
>
> Thank you
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
1 Like
I have a BAQ and Report that shows basically what¹s available to be worked
in in WIP per area sorted based on Sales Order due date showing stuff that¹s
coming due or overdue first. Our techs use it to figure out ³what I need to
work on first² and its a lot easier to deal with than the stock Priority
Dispatch report.

I can send it/post it if you¹d like.

-bws


On 1/30/09 2:17 PM, "Lynn" <lynn.khalife@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> You won't be able to "re-create" the report unless you decide to
> start completely from scratch and build your own BAQ and write a BAQ
> report.
>
> The Priority Dispatch Report is not based on any actual database
> table. It is based on a (temporary) view called JCR65. No one knows
> how the Epicor developers arrive at this view.
>
> This is what you should do:
>
> You can basically know what is in the view by going to the Report
> Data Definitions for PrioDisp. Use the Duplicate Report command in
> the Actions menu to Copy the PrioDisp to a new name. Then click on
> the JCR65 table and then click on the "Excluded Fields" tab. Add any
> additional fields that you want.
>
> Then decide what table (from the Data Dictionary) to get your desired
> field from. Add that table to your PrioDis2 data definition then
> select your desired field(s).
>
> Then, add a New Relationship between the JCR65 and your new table.
> Here's the other part people have trouble with: The drop-downs don't
> seem to work for this data definition. All you need to do to
> overcome this problem is simply to manually type your desired table
> and field names. This will work.
>
> When your linking is properly completed, everything else will work
> just as it normally does when you modify Epicor-provided Crystal
> Reports.
>
> Lynn
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> , "Jeff
> Stockard" <jeff.stockard@...>
> wrote:
>> >
>> > Does anyone know where the Priority Dispatch Report gets the data
> from. My
>> > scheduling agent wants the Job Due date on the Priority Dispatch
> Report but
>> > I don't know how to add this to the Crystal report without re-
> creating the
>> > entire report. Is there an easier way to do this?
>> >
>> > Thank you
>> >
>> > Jeff
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]