Jiwa

Hi,
In the tables IN_DebtorSpecificPrice and IN_DebtorClassificationSpecificPrice there is a new field for ItemNo.

In some databases this ItemNo = 0 even when there several records with the same InventoryID for a Price. Yet in other circumstances they have sequential numbers, which I would think is standard.
My question is are the ItemNos supposed to be sequential in all cases? There seems to be no detrimental effect with either of the values. Perhaps the 0's are from converted V6 DB's?

Cheers

We started introducing ItemNo columns to tables a while back, and even introduced unique composite keys to prevent against duplicate ItemNo's in the same context (e.g.: no two rows in IN_Notes can have the same ItemNo AND InventoryID).

We did this so users could drag rows on the screen to reorder them, and when saved they display back in the expected order (as we always ORDER BY ItemNo in tables with an ItemNo column when reading).

They should be sequential, and when databases are upgraded we do renumber them to be sequential - when we've identified such tables.

In this case, there is probably no harm in having duplicates - you can tell fairly quickly by editing two debtor specific or class specific pricing rows for the same product and saving - if no error, then it's not an issue.

I've logged bugs BUGS-5198 and BUGS-5199 to look into this.

Mike

Thanks for the explanation.
Cheers