The Magic Track Multiple UOMs checkbox makes for a fat PartUOM table

Just wondering if anyone has noticed that if you check the Track Multiple UOM checkbox on the part it adds all UOMs from the part class to the PartUOM table for that part. However, it does not remove them if you uncheck it.

Is anyone aware of a conversion or datafix that might resolve this orphaned data?

1 Like

Anyone??? I’m about to use a sledgehammer to fix this issue. :cry:

I’d say don’t even worry about it - the PartUOM table has limited columns, and you’ve probably not got hundreds of UOMs configured. The overall space used to store these records won’t be significant, and they’re not doing any harm so just ignore.

1 Like

Had the opportunity to fix it so I did. Removed nearly 700k of records. What I’d be really interested in is to why unchecking the track multiple UOM checkbox doesn’t do some sort of cleanup. I am guessing it might have something to do with parttran records, referential integrity blahdy blahdy etc…but I’m not sure.

I ran into this recently and found this thread while searching for something else.

I think there are some insidious bugs lurking around this. I noticed that if you uncheck part specific on a UOMConv (which my predecessor apparently did to a whole bunch of them), it does not remove the PartUOMs. The PartUOM is still visible in the part’s UOMs tab, but it’s grayed out. If track multiple is not checked, it’s just clutter that seems to have no effect on anything. But if track multiple is checked, the conversion factor from the PartUOM remains effective, and cannot be edited or deleted.

We have no PartTran records yet, so that’s not the reason PartUOM isn’t cleaned up. I’m going to have to take the sledgehammer approach myself if we don’t just start over from scratch.

1 Like