Weird report run
Boaz Bezborodko
boaz at mirrotek.com
Wed Sep 13 12:32:34 PDT 2006
Have you looked at the selection set since the problem. Is it as it
should be?
Richard Kreiss
---
Yes
Boa
GCC Consulting wrote:
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:*
> filepro-list-bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.celestial.com]
> *On Behalf Of *Boaz Bezborodko
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 13, 2006 2:38 PM
> *To:* joe at magnatechonline.com
> *Cc:* filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> *Subject:* Re: Weird report run
>
> In this case the selection set is based on a 1 character wide
> flag-type field. The sort and form-breaks were done on the Vendor
> name in the sort table for the form. So while the selection might
> have been played with the sort and printout should still have
> broken out OK. Except that that's not what happened.
>
> The user assures me that they used the system to select only the
> one invoice, but the system selected a bunch or other, seemingly
> random, invoices and put them on the same form even as it
> generated new check records for them.
>
> As I said, generating the checks would not have been strange if it
> wasn't for the user swearing that they weren't selected (and I
> believe him). But to select them erroneously, properly process
> them, and then put them on the same form without the form-breaks
> just seems very strange.
>
> Boaz
>
> Have you looked at the selection set since the problem. Is it as
> it should be?
>
> Richard Kreiss
>
>
>
> Joe Chasan wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 01:49:32PM -0400, Boaz Bezborodko wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Knowing the user I would seriously doubt that either of these were
>>>played with. In any case it wouldn't explain the other weird behavior
>>>of why the output didn't break into separate forms.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>yes, it could.
>>
>>take the below example.
>>
>>vendor number field is of length 6. you sort/subtotal by that field
>>number.
>>
>>report selects data for vendor #100001, 100002, 100003.
>>
>>if sort is of length 6, these will appear in different subtotal groupings
>>and/or pages depending on how you have set this up - all well and good.
>>
>>lets say, however,that the sort length is of a number less than 6 - for
>>the above 3 data items, a length 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 will all put these
>>items in the same grouping as the first X (where X is 0/1/2/3/4/5 per above)
>>number of characters of those fields are the same.
>>
>>-joe
>>
>>
>>
>>>Joe Chasan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>if the user has access to modify either the selection set or the sort
>>>>criteria, i'd look at those as possible causes.
>>>>
>>>>-joe
>>>>
>>>>On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 01:31:13PM -0400, Boaz Bezborodko wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Through a selection set. (Looking for a "Y" in a particular field.)
>>>>>
>>>>>GCC Consulting wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>From:
>>>>>>>filepro-list-bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.celestial
>>>>>>>.com
>>>>>>>[mailto:filepro-list-bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.c
>>>>>>>elestial.com] On Behalf Of Boaz Bezborodko
>>>>>>>Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 1:11 PM
>>>>>>>To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
>>>>>>>Subject: Weird report run
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>A user ran a report that had a very weird result and I need
>>>>>>>help trying to figure out why. This is a report that has
>>>>>>>been running fine for a long time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The report picks out invoices to pay and then generates
>>>>>>>checks for them. Each invoice is a line on the report and
>>>>>>>the sort order is by vendor with a new form being generated
>>>>>>>for each new vendor. When it does so it generates a new
>>>>>>>check number and creates a new record for this check in the
>>>>>>>checks file.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The weird thing on this run was that on this run they were
>>>>>>>only generating one check, but a bunch o invoices that should
>>>>>>>not have been selected, from different vendors, were chosen
>>>>>>>and they were printed all on the first form for the original
>>>>>>>check. They should not have been selected, but they were.
>>>>>>>They should not have shown up on the first form as part of
>>>>>>>the one check that was supposed to have run, but they did.
>>>>>>>And they should not have generated their own checks, but they
>>>>>>>did. That last part was the one part that was consistent
>>>>>>>with their being printed even though they shouldn't have
>>>>>>>because they didn't conform to the selection criteria.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I've reviewed the code and can't find any reason why this
>>>>>>>should have happened. Any suggestions as to why the errant
>>>>>>>selection and sort behavior?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Note: I'm using FP 4.8 on Windows.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Boaz
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>What is the criteria that you are using to select invoice to pay?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Is this through -v processing or a selection set?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Richard Kreiss
>>>>>>GCC Consulting
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Filepro-list mailing list
>>>>>Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
>>>>>http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---
>>>>-Joe Chasan- Magnatech Business Systems, Inc.
>>>>joe at magnatechonline.com Hicksville, NY - USA
>>>>http://www.MagnatechOnline.com Tel.(516) 931-4444/Fax.(516) 931-1264
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---
>>-Joe Chasan- Magnatech Business Systems, Inc.
>>joe at magnatechonline.com Hicksville, NY - USA
>>http://www.MagnatechOnline.com Tel.(516) 931-4444/Fax.(516) 931-1264
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachments/20060913/dfc42e7c/attachment.html
More information about the Filepro-list
mailing list