Question for those still on 6.1

Yahoo Archive
1
I have not been given an explanation. But then I am not usually
given an explanation only which patch or version has fixed the 'known
issue'. Although, I will say that in version 6.1 Tech support did
NOT seem aware of the issue and I had to document steps to recreate
it. Afterwhich, I was told that it was corrected in 8.0.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Geary, Stephanie" <sgeary@...> wrote:
>
> We fully use the Quality Module. Have they ever given you a reason
for
> this problem? We started on 4 went to 5.1 then 5.2 then 6 then 6.1
and
> have never had this particular DMR problem.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf
> Of jpleau2
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:09 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Question for those still on 6.1
>
>
>
> Stephanie,
>
> The simple answer is; when failing a subcontract operation via a
non-
> conformance the quantities and costs cannot be reconciled. There is
> NO correlation.
>
> It looks like the Programmers are somewhere between "fail pcs. for
> subcontract part" and "fail pcs. for job". If the part is finally
> accepted back to the job, the numbers wash. But if the part is
> rejected. The costs that come out of the job are ???? In our
> example we failed and rejected 4pcs * $1725 = $6900, the amount
> removed from the job was $35,924. G/L, WIP are also incorrect but
> with different #'s.
>
> We've been told that DMR problem is fixed in 8.0. I haven't done
the
> testing yet but I'm not holding my breath. DMR problems are the
> reason we were forced to upgrade from 5.2 to 6.1 with promises that
> the problem was fixed in 6.1.
>
> Jill
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "Geary, Stephanie" <sgeary@> wrote:
> >
> > What was the DMR problem?
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%
40yahoogroups.com> ] On
> Behalf
> > Of jpleau2
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 8:03 AM
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Vantage] Re: Question for those still on 6.1
> >
> >
> >
> > We upgraded to .542 with Tech support promises of a DMR fix --
This
> > patch made the DMR issue worse, but otherwise no problems.
> >
> > Jill
> >
> > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> > "Mike" <mclabaugh@> wrote:
> > >
> > > We are running 6.1.543 without any noticeable issues.
> > >
> > > Mike.
> > >
> > > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%
40yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:vantage%
> 40yahoogroups.com> ,
> > "Geary, Stephanie" <sgeary@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello all...
> > > >
> > > > I don't know how many people are still on 6.1 besides us. We
> > are
> > > > still on 6.1.529 and were wondering about doing all the
> patches.
> > I
> > > was
> > > > just curious if any one knew of any problems with these
> patches.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Stephanie
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > This message has been processed via your triumphgroup.com e-mail
> > address.
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
> This message has been processed via your triumphgroup.com e-mail
> address.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
2
I am attempting to create a PO Status BAQ that contains the basic
information regarding AP POs (PO#, order date, vendor, total, etc..)

I would also like to include the date the PO/Invoice was paid and the
check number. I cannot figure out a way to link the APTran table to
get this data.

Here are the tables I am currently using:
PODetail
PORel
POMisc
POHeader
Vendor

Any ideas or tricks you might know of?

Thanks in advance for any help you can provide.
3
I had some ideas on this, but I didn't have time to get back to you
until now.

Add these 2 additional tables to your BAQ:

APInvHed
APInvDtl

Then link your APTran table to APInvHed via 2 fields, APTran.Company
= APInvHed.Company; APTran.InvoiceNum = APInvHed.InvoiceNum.

Then link your APInvHed to APInvDtl via 2 fiels, APInvHed.Company =
APInvDtl.Company; APInvHed.InvoiceNum = APInvDtl.InvoiceNum.

APInvDtl contains the PONum, POLine, and PORelNum fields, so link the
APInvDtl and your remaining tables using these fields: Company,
VendorNum, PONum, POLine, & PORelNum.

Lynn




--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "cookygrl33" <crystal@...> wrote:
>
> I am attempting to create a PO Status BAQ that contains the basic
> information regarding AP POs (PO#, order date, vendor, total,
etc..)
>
> I would also like to include the date the PO/Invoice was paid and
the
> check number. I cannot figure out a way to link the APTran table to
> get this data.
>
> Here are the tables I am currently using:
> PODetail
> PORel
> POMisc
> POHeader
> Vendor
>
> Any ideas or tricks you might know of?
>
> Thanks in advance for any help you can provide.
>
4
Hello all...

I don't know how many people are still on 6.1 besides us. We are
still on 6.1.529 and were wondering about doing all the patches. I was
just curious if any one knew of any problems with these patches.

Thanks.

Stephanie





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
5
Hi Stephanie,

We are on 6.10.541. We did that patch quite a while ago, but I don't
remember any problem with it.

Liz


________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Geary, Stephanie
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 01:27 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Question for those still on 6.1



Hello all...

I don't know how many people are still on 6.1 besides us. We are
still on 6.1.529 and were wondering about doing all the patches. I was
just curious if any one knew of any problems with these patches.

Thanks.

Stephanie

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






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
6
Thanks Lynn! I always end up finding it funny how easy it is to get
the data I want after I spend a ton of time trying to make it work.
This has definitely been one of those cases. I appreciate your help!

~Crystal~


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Lynn" <lynn.khalife@...> wrote:
>
> I had some ideas on this, but I didn't have time to get back to you
> until now.
>
> Add these 2 additional tables to your BAQ:
>
> APInvHed
> APInvDtl
>
> Then link your APTran table to APInvHed via 2 fields, APTran.Company
> = APInvHed.Company; APTran.InvoiceNum = APInvHed.InvoiceNum.
>
> Then link your APInvHed to APInvDtl via 2 fiels, APInvHed.Company =
> APInvDtl.Company; APInvHed.InvoiceNum = APInvDtl.InvoiceNum.
>
> APInvDtl contains the PONum, POLine, and PORelNum fields, so link the
> APInvDtl and your remaining tables using these fields: Company,
> VendorNum, PONum, POLine, & PORelNum.
>
> Lynn
>
>
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "cookygrl33" <crystal@> wrote:
> >
> > I am attempting to create a PO Status BAQ that contains the basic
> > information regarding AP POs (PO#, order date, vendor, total,
> etc..)
> >
> > I would also like to include the date the PO/Invoice was paid and
> the
> > check number. I cannot figure out a way to link the APTran table to
> > get this data.
> >
> > Here are the tables I am currently using:
> > PODetail
> > PORel
> > POMisc
> > POHeader
> > Vendor
> >
> > Any ideas or tricks you might know of?
> >
> > Thanks in advance for any help you can provide.
> >
>
7
We are running 6.1.543 without any noticeable issues.

Mike.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Geary, Stephanie" <sgeary@...> wrote:
>
> Hello all...
>
> I don't know how many people are still on 6.1 besides us. We are
> still on 6.1.529 and were wondering about doing all the patches. I
was
> just curious if any one knew of any problems with these patches.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Stephanie
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
8
We upgraded to .542 with Tech support promises of a DMR fix -- This
patch made the DMR issue worse, but otherwise no problems.

Jill

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" <mclabaugh@...> wrote:
>
> We are running 6.1.543 without any noticeable issues.
>
> Mike.
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Geary, Stephanie" <sgeary@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello all...
> >
> > I don't know how many people are still on 6.1 besides us. We
are
> > still on 6.1.529 and were wondering about doing all the patches.
I
> was
> > just curious if any one knew of any problems with these patches.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Stephanie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
9
What was the DMR problem?



________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of jpleau2
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 8:03 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Question for those still on 6.1



We upgraded to .542 with Tech support promises of a DMR fix -- This
patch made the DMR issue worse, but otherwise no problems.

Jill

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Mike" <mclabaugh@...> wrote:
>
> We are running 6.1.543 without any noticeable issues.
>
> Mike.
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Geary, Stephanie" <sgeary@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello all...
> >
> > I don't know how many people are still on 6.1 besides us. We
are
> > still on 6.1.529 and were wondering about doing all the patches.
I
> was
> > just curious if any one knew of any problems with these patches.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Stephanie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>


This message has been processed via your triumphgroup.com e-mail
address.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
10
We are running 6.1.543 without any new problems also.

Russell Wright
Controller
Triton Industries, Inc.
Phone (517) 322-3822
Fax (517) 322-3872




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
11
Stephanie,

The simple answer is; when failing a subcontract operation via a non-
conformance the quantities and costs cannot be reconciled. There is
NO correlation.

It looks like the Programmers are somewhere between "fail pcs. for
subcontract part" and "fail pcs. for job". If the part is finally
accepted back to the job, the numbers wash. But if the part is
rejected. The costs that come out of the job are ???? In our
example we failed and rejected 4pcs * $1725 = $6900, the amount
removed from the job was $35,924. G/L, WIP are also incorrect but
with different #'s.

We've been told that DMR problem is fixed in 8.0. I haven't done the
testing yet but I'm not holding my breath. DMR problems are the
reason we were forced to upgrade from 5.2 to 6.1 with promises that
the problem was fixed in 6.1.


Jill



--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Geary, Stephanie" <sgeary@...> wrote:
>
> What was the DMR problem?
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf
> Of jpleau2
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 8:03 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Question for those still on 6.1
>
>
>
> We upgraded to .542 with Tech support promises of a DMR fix -- This
> patch made the DMR issue worse, but otherwise no problems.
>
> Jill
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "Mike" <mclabaugh@> wrote:
> >
> > We are running 6.1.543 without any noticeable issues.
> >
> > Mike.
> >
> > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%
40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "Geary, Stephanie" <sgeary@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello all...
> > >
> > > I don't know how many people are still on 6.1 besides us. We
> are
> > > still on 6.1.529 and were wondering about doing all the
patches.
> I
> > was
> > > just curious if any one knew of any problems with these
patches.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Stephanie
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>
>
> This message has been processed via your triumphgroup.com e-mail
> address.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
12
We fully use the Quality Module. Have they ever given you a reason for
this problem? We started on 4 went to 5.1 then 5.2 then 6 then 6.1 and
have never had this particular DMR problem.



________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of jpleau2
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:09 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Question for those still on 6.1



Stephanie,

The simple answer is; when failing a subcontract operation via a non-
conformance the quantities and costs cannot be reconciled. There is
NO correlation.

It looks like the Programmers are somewhere between "fail pcs. for
subcontract part" and "fail pcs. for job". If the part is finally
accepted back to the job, the numbers wash. But if the part is
rejected. The costs that come out of the job are ???? In our
example we failed and rejected 4pcs * $1725 = $6900, the amount
removed from the job was $35,924. G/L, WIP are also incorrect but
with different #'s.

We've been told that DMR problem is fixed in 8.0. I haven't done the
testing yet but I'm not holding my breath. DMR problems are the
reason we were forced to upgrade from 5.2 to 6.1 with promises that
the problem was fixed in 6.1.

Jill

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Geary, Stephanie" <sgeary@...> wrote:
>
> What was the DMR problem?
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
> Of jpleau2
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 8:03 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Question for those still on 6.1
>
>
>
> We upgraded to .542 with Tech support promises of a DMR fix -- This
> patch made the DMR issue worse, but otherwise no problems.
>
> Jill
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "Mike" <mclabaugh@> wrote:
> >
> > We are running 6.1.543 without any noticeable issues.
> >
> > Mike.
> >
> > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%
40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "Geary, Stephanie" <sgeary@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello all...
> > >
> > > I don't know how many people are still on 6.1 besides us. We
> are
> > > still on 6.1.529 and were wondering about doing all the
patches.
> I
> > was
> > > just curious if any one knew of any problems with these
patches.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Stephanie
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>
>
> This message has been processed via your triumphgroup.com e-mail
> address.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


This message has been processed via your triumphgroup.com e-mail
address.



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