Incorrect sort order of rows in Purchase Order based on Sales Order

Hello Experts.
I have this problem on SAP B1 8.81 PL 04:
I create a Purchase Order based on a Sales Order with 10 item rows, ticking the purchase order box in the logistic tab.
The sort order of rows is different between PO and SO.
I need the same order of SO on PO.
Is there something I can do or it's a problem of this patch?
I saw the Sap Note nr. 824822 but it's related to SAP B1 version 2004 A...
Regards
Silvia Reggiani
Edited by: Silvia Reggiani on Oct 11, 2011 12:26 PM

Hi,
Are you able to reproduce the issue in the DEMO Database on the 8.81 PL04?
Also, have you checked the issue in the latest patch of the 8.81?
Kind Regards,
Jitin
SAP Business One Forum Team

Similar Messages

Thunar: incorrect sort order

Hello, everyone.
Guys, maybe any of you encountered with that problem in Thunar... especially if you use cyrillic letters in file or folder names.
I have the latest version of Thunar (1.4.0) installed, and it turns out it incorrectly sorts contents of folders.
I can not even understand the way Thunar sorts contents of any folder.
Here is the contents of one folder "sorted" by name (ascending).
Looking from top to bottom I see file names starting with...
cyrillic upper letters
digits
cyrillic lower letters
again digits
again cyrillic lower letters
english lower letters
and again cyrillic lower letters
Concrete example of another folder "sorted" by name:
голубь.txt
иволга.txt
аист.txt
орёл.txt
сова.txt
Absoluletly wrong order. The file with name that starts with 'A' is in the middle.
Cyrillic alpabet is:
Аа Бб Вв Гг Дд Ее Ёё Жж Зз Ии Йй Кк Лл Мм Нн Оо Пп Рр Сс Тт Уу Фф Хх Цц Чч Шш Щщ ЬЬ Ыы ЪЪ Ээ Юю Яя
Meanwhile
ls -1
gives right order
аист.txt
голубь.txt
иволга.txt
орёл.txt
сова.txt
PCManFM and other filemanagers give right sort order.
So, Thunar DOES NOT sort with 'ls'. Also, sort order of Thunar CAN NOT be changed using LC_COLLATE.
Thunar uses its own "mega-wise" algorithm.
P.S.
By the way, before version 1.4.0, everything was OK in Thunar. So one day their devs decided to make some "improvements".
Last edited by BrainWorker (2012-08-14 02:28:35)

BrainWorker wrote:
AaronBP wrote:They notice because they are in the CC list. Whenever a new comment comes in they get an email. You should not open a new bug if there's already one open about it.
I don't really care if they are going to complain about it or not. My goal is to make them pay attention to this bug, because I think it is nicely forgotten.
This is open source, bro. You can't make anybody do anything, but you might encourage some admin to ban you if you willfully break rules. If you can't break open the source and fix the problem yourself (which is surely the most speedy solution!), you're better off following community procedures and being as helpful as possible. Otherwise you'll just be excluded and ignored.

All Photos Album Incorrect Sort Order

When I view the album "All Photos" from iCloud.com my photos are sorted by date with the newest ones at the bottom. When I view "All Photos" within iOS or the OS X app, the sorting order isn't correct. Any ideas?
Thanks!

I think this is an embarrassing thought-fail on Apple's part.
After removing good ways of sharing photos from one library to another, people end up having to get older pictures, or pictures loaded into a laptop while traveling, back onto our main Photos libraries though copying (edited) files over the network and re-add them. This create systematic discrepancies in date added and date taken.
When "All Photos" Panoramas", "Videos" and otherwise handy views can only be viewed by date added they add to the feeling of having to keep your photos in an exposed disorder.
If you think of a photo, do you think about when/where you took it or when/to what library you added the photo?
People think of the first, and machines (and now apparently Apple) intuitively think of the second..
But maybe I'm too harsh, and I have missed something. Can anybody see a good reason for focusing on date added rather than date taken?

Incorrect Sort Order - On Home Page - News and Announcements

On the Company sub-pages "News and Announcements" the sort order is correct. The most recently added News or Announcements is at the top of the list sorted by Publish Date.
However on the Home Page they are not.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
BG...

Hi,
There is Enhancement Request on this problem created on Metalink (Bug 5571606) for about a year. It is marked as "Very desirable feature" but no info about when this desireable feature will be available. I asked Portal consultant at Oracle Services and was told, it depends on how many and how big customers would request this feature on behalf of their valid Support Contract.
So the only way I think is to create Service Requests on Metalink asking for patch.
I did in September 2006, what about you dear colleagues?
Regards Jiri Rohlicek

Incorrect sorting order

I have a description column in my report that will not sort in the right order (desc or asc). The other five columns sort correctly, but this one column sorts the first column of the report (primary key ID). The ID is sorted as follows:
104
105
10
11
12
ect....
This happens to be the same sequence if I sort asc or desc of the description column. Any ideas on how i can get this description column to sort properly?
I'm not using breaks, order by, or any special sort sequence. On the page attributes I have checked sort for all the columns visible, and left the sort sequence blank. Thanks!!

Sorry I wasn't explicit enough in my details. This is the outcome of my report.
This is before I sort on any column.
ID CODE DESCRIPTION ABBREV SYS DESC [u]DATE
49, HEXP, VEHICLE TAX ...., SNOWATV, SNOWMOBILE, ?
3, PRRT, PREMIUM RATE, MSI, MINE SUBSIDENCE, ?
4, RFT, REFUND TYPE, MSI, MINE SUBSIDENCE, ?
ect....
You can see that When I perform a desc or asc sort on the SYS DESC column I get these results, which are not correct.
104 COREP COMPLAINT LETTER COMPLAINTS COMPLAINTS TRACKING
105 EMTYPEMPLOYEE POSITION COMPLAINTS COMPLAINTS TRACKING ?
10 STRFF PAM PAR MSI MINE SUBSIDENCE ?
146 FATYP FACILITY TYPES AIMSBAQ AIR INFORMATION MANAGEMENT ?
14 PLOID OWNER TYPES MSI MINE SUBSIDENCE ?
You can see that the sys description column is not in alphabetical order. Any ideas why? If I sort that column using a tool on the database it will sort correctly, but htmldb will not sort it correctly? You also can see that it did sort the ID column as I described in my previous post. The sys description column is varchar2 and contains no numeric values.

Custom Sort of Duplicated row walues in Webi based on SAP BW Universe

It is a duplicate thread i have already posted in Integration kits - SAP section.
This is regarding custom sorting of row value which are duplicated in Webi which is based on SAP BW Universe.
I have created Webi Report based on Characteristic structure. Using Alerter I provide some space for child node to notify it as child node below a parent node.
Please see a sample table below:
AAAA
onpeak
midpeak
offpeak
BBBB
onpeak
midpeak
offpeak.
If I enable Avoid duplicate row aggregation, i will be able to see duplicate rows for "onpeak" etc. Since Webi does a default sorting, I have to make a custom sort to replicate the structure followed. And in custom sort i dont see duplicated rows, and i see only one "onpeak". Accordingly if I try to sort using custom sort, then the result will be
AAAA
onpeak
onpeak
midpeak
midpeak
offpeak
offpeak
BBBB.
Please let me know if anyone has any solution for this.
I have already created report with modifying the row names in backend by adding letter before its value for example "1offpeak" for the duplicated row and then removing the letter "1" in webi using substring. But i know this is the crude way of doing it.

I have changed the naming convention in BI structure by introducing a white space before the name to avoid duplication and used it in report. Not a good solution anyway.

Sort order in Paragraph Catalog inconsistent / incorrect

b Problem Description:
Sort order of paragraph styles INCONSISTENT/INCORRECT when compared to standard alphabetical sort. From the Paragraph Catalog, or when I select F9, styles starting with "1a_" sort before styles starting with "1_". If a table with the style names is sorted, "1_" comes before "1a_".
This sort order worked correctly in FM7.2. In FM8.x, it started sorting incorrectly. Our template was designed based on the standard sort order for characters, which somehow changed starting in FM8.x.
b Steps to Reproduce:
Generated a list of para styles in our template, converted to table, sorted, and compared to the Paragraph Catalog.
b Actual Result:
1a_Heading1_NoTOC
b out of order
1k_Title_Kit
b out of order
1_Heading1
1_Heading1TOC
2a_Heading2_NoTOC
b out of order
2_Heading2
2_Heading2TOC
3_Heading3
4_Heading4
5_Heading_RunIn
6_Heading_Subtopic
7a_Heading_SGD_Command
b out of order
7a_Heading_SGD_CommandTOC
b out of order
7b_Heading_ZBI_CommandTOC
b out of order
7b_SGD_Cmnd_Hdg_narrowTOC
b out of order
7_Heading_ZPL_Command
7_Heading_ZPL_CommandLOP
7_Heading_ZPL_CommandTOC
8_ZPL_Function
8_ZPL_FunctionTOC
b Expected Result:
Styles should sort (and used to) as follows:
1_Heading1
1_Heading1TOC
1a_Heading1_NoTOC
1k_Title_Kit
2_Heading2
2_Heading2TOC
2a_Heading2_NoTOC
3_Heading3
4_Heading4
5_Heading_RunIn
6_Heading_Subtopic
7_Heading_ZPL_Command
7_Heading_ZPL_CommandLOP
7_Heading_ZPL_CommandTOC
7a_Heading_SGD_Command
7a_Heading_SGD_CommandTOC
7b_Heading_ZBI_CommandTOC
7b_SGD_Cmnd_Hdg_narrowTOC
8_ZPL_Function
8_ZPL_FunctionTOC

I have the same problem. I've lost track now of the number of times where I've assigned the wrong paragraph style to something since switching to FM8. The styles are no longer in the same order, so my level 1 heading is no longer the first tag that comes up when I press F9. Now I have to dig for it through other tags that start with the number 1 in our catalog.
Our paragraph tags were developed years ago, and it wasn't until FM8 that there was a problem with the sort order. The characters no longer sort the same as Windows sorts. An underscore is supposed to come before all letters and numbers. Adobe, please fix this annoying bug!!!
Donna Jones
Mikado, Michigan

The row in Purchase order documents cannot be closed.

I try to close a row in Purchase Order by using the Right Click -> Close Row option, or from the Data menu.
When I click on the 'Update' button, the following Error massage appear: Document rows cannot be closed concurrently with the other document modification you have made. The row cannot be closed.
Using SAP Business One 2007 A (8.00.241) SP: 01 PL: 14 HOTFIX1
Please advice the solution to solve this problem.

Hi.......
Do you have any kind of SP Transaction notification for Autoupdation?
Please mention here because such things happen due to the FMS or SPs applied to the DB.....
Also please check this thread......
Document rows Cannot be closed concurrently - Purchase Orders
Documents rows cannot be closed concurrently with the other document modify
Regards,
Rahul
Edited by: RAHUL MOUNDEKAR on Aug 8, 2011 9:44 AM

Error: The sort order specified for distinct count records is incorrect

When processing a measure group with a distinct count measure in it, i get the following error:
"The sort order specified for distinct count records is incorrect."
I have no idea what this means - any ideas?

I had the same problem and your fix worked. In more detail, the problematic field was contract_no. I added a named calculation to the table in the Data Source View with the formula CHECKSUM(contract_no). Then I created the distinct count measure on that named calculation. And, lo and behold, the errors disappeared!
Thank you to Frank.
- CindyCindy P Hoskey

Changing sort order in iTunes does not change order on iPad

If you create a new playlist (not a smart playlist) in iTunes, you can get the songs to order according to the track number or the name of the song or the size etc. It used to be that this selected sort order would be reflected in the corresponding playlists on the iPhone/iPad
This doesn't seem to work using iTunes 10.6, iTunes Match and iOS 5.1 on my iPad 2.
1. I create a new playlist in iTunes and name it Test.
2. I sort this playlist by the Name column, so that the songs are in the A to Z order (Fernando, SOS, Waterloo)
3. The new playlist appears on my iPad.
4. The iPad playlist lists the songs in the order selected in iTunes.
Now, back in iTunes, I click on the Name column again, so the names are now sorted in reverse. That is, from Z to A (Waterloo, SOS, Fernando). I also rename the playlist to Test 2 so that I know that the same playlist has been updated on my iPad.
So the playlist Test 2 is now ordered by the song name from Z to A in iTunes. However, the playlist on the iPad does NOT reflect the new sort order. It is still ordered A to Z, not Z to A as I expected.
5. Now I create a new playlist named Test 3. I open Test 2 (still in the order Z to A) and copy the songs to Test 3.
6. The new playlist named Test 3 appears on the iPad.
7. The songs are in the correct order.
8. Change the order again in the playlist.
9. The change in the order is NOT reflected on the iPad.
Grrr. I quit the Music app (including the background process on the iPad) and launch it again. But the order of the songs in Test 2 is still not the same as in iTunes.
Totally frustrated, I do the following:
1. Quit all apps running in the background on the iPad.
2. Go to Settings and turn off iTunes Match.
3. Log out of the iTunes store.
4. Restart my iPad so that the playlists disappear from my Music app.
5. Turn iTunes Match back on.
6. Log back into the Store.
7. Wait for the iCloud to sync.
8. Playlist Test 2 is still in the incorrect order! This is unbelievable.
I have tried the Right-Click 'Copy to Play Order' trick that I read about in another post but it doesn't help.
Is anyone else experiencing this problem? Any solutions?
Thanks in advance.

This isn't an issue of putting songs on that I don't want, it's that it doesn't CHANGE my music, even when I try to make it change. I've got over 15000 songs in my iTunes; my iPod can only hold around 275 songs. My problem, is that I can't make it "randomly" choose different songs. when I try to change the music, it puts the same songs on over and over.
Emphasis here is on RANDOM: I do not want to have to select the music to put on my shuffle. and
CHANGE: If I only wanted to listen to the same 275 songs, I wouldn't have bothered purchasing the others...

WHERE clause affects sort order???

Hi,
I'm playing around with linguistic sorting and comparing and was using the examples from
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14225/ch5lingsort.htm#g1018324
So I have the three entries Große, große and Grosse in my table (the sample data from the manual)
To test these features, I did
alter session set nls_comp = Linguistic;
alter session set nls_sort = XGerman_CI; and ran the following select statement:
SELECT name
FROM words
ORDER BY 1;The rows are then returned in the following order:
Große
große
Grosse
which is exactly what I expect.
When I run
SELECT name
FROM words
WHERE name = 'Grosse'; it returns all three rows which is expected as well.
When I add the ORDER BY (which is the same ORDER BY as in the first step):
SELECT name
FROM words
WHERE name = 'Grosse'
ORDER BY 1; the rows are returned in the following order
Große
Grosse
große
which is different to the order without the WHERE clause (and wrong)
The question is: why does the WHERE clause affect the ordering?

I'm not sure why you think the third sort order is incorrect. In English, the capitals will sort before the lower case leaving both "G" values before the "g". I don't know where the special ... German? ... character will appear but assume that ORDER BY is sorting correctly. If not you need to contact Oracle and open a support ticket.
WHERE clauses will affect how data comes back by influencing index use, but some of what they do will be random. The only way to be sure data will be returned in a certain order is to use an ORDER BY clause.
In particular, in 10g the parallel query option is notorious for returnding data in random order. Where in 9i an indexed lookup would tend to return data in an imaginary sorted order the same query using PQO in 10g often returns data in random order.

Line Sort order differs from Shopping Cart to PO

All :
A number of shopping carts are raised on the back of a quotation received from vendors.
Where these quotes require a multi line Purchase Order, we enter the data in the same sequence as they appear on the quotation.
The Purchase Order should also therefore reflect the same sequence. For some reason this does not happen.
EG shopping cart shows items:
1st Line 30 Green Widgets
2nd Line 50 Blue Widgets
3rd Line 900 Red Widgets
BUT PO shows:
1st Line 50 Blue Widgets
2nd Line 30 Green Widgets
3rd Line 900 Red Widgets
Is there some setting I am missing somewhere? Or is there some sort of arcane sorting going on in the background that I don't know about.
Thanks for your time guys
Adrian

Hi
<b>Seems like a bug in the BAPI call at R/3 side.The sorting incase of multi line Purchase Orders is not happening correctly. Please give some more details.</b>
Please report the same bug to SAP by creating a OSS message as well, for faster processing of the query.
Regards
- Atul

Album sort order suddenly gone crazy iTunes

G'day people
For some reason, the last couple of albums I've downloaded from the iTunes store, to my iTunes, displays those albums groups by artist instead of album. Even when I select them an manually change the sort order it makes no difference.
Pre-existing albums already in iTunes are not affected, just newly downloaded. This is also happening with albums I purchase directly from the iPhone and sync back to iTunes on my Mac.
Has anybody else come across this problem and have any suggestions on how I can fix it?
Cheers
Al

Figured it out. I added "Various Artists" in the Album Artist field for every track and it then sorted them all together.

Mapping in TopLink workbench: Sorting order for one-to-one mapping field

Hi,
we have a requirement; though it is one-to-many relationship, we wanted to map it as one-to-one, so that we get latest of the mappped entity based on attribute:*noOfVisits*. For this, I am trying to make descending order by noOfVisists in workbench; but no provision there.. it is available only for one-to-many relationship;
If I map as one-to-many, I can specify the sorting order; but is there any option to limit the max rows of it to *1*.
Pls suggest the solution; I am trying to avoid to write named query for this; and wanted to get from the entity itself by navigating to one-to-one relationship entity.
Thanks,
Dhana kumar.

Hello,
If you want strictly JPA options, I'd either not map it and query for it (which you can then store it in the object if you want in a transient attribute), or map it as 1:M with the order by and have a getSingleVistedChild type method that returns the first element if its noOfVisits value is 1.
Mapping it using the 1:1 as you are asking can be done. All that is required is that you add selection criteria for the query used in the mapping as described here:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink/Examples/JPA/MappingSelectionCriteria
Best Regards,
Chris

ITunes U Sort Order Issue

I purchase a lot of audio courses from a company called the Teaching Company. I buy and download them as MP3's and they've worked great on all my iPods (I have a nano, a classic, and a touch 64GB). I previously kept all of the course lectures in my Audiobook section to keep them separate from my music and podcasts and other media. This was fine until I decided to purchase an Audible account and began to build up a large library of audiobooks as well. When I got my brand new 64GB iPod Touch and the new iTunes, I saw that iTunes U was now a separate entity within my library. So, for organizational purposes and to allow me to better fine-tuning of my sync preferences (I much more media than could ever fit on any of my iPods at one time), I moved all my educational and lecture media out of my Audiobooks area and into iTunes U by editing the tags through "get info".
This has worked just fine except for one mysterious problem.
When I view any of these audio courses (each course is an album) in iTunes, they display fine in normal sort order by track number. But when I go to listen to them on my iPod, the sort order is all jumbled up and all the tracks are out of order. So I cannot listen to the classes from one lecture to another, at the end of each lecture I must exit back to the album and FIND the next lecture. They appear to be sorted in no obvious order (not alphabetical, not by name, not by track number). Again, they are set to sort by track number in iTunes and they display (and play) perfectly straight through in iTunes. But on my iPod, the sort order is completely messed up.
So, what's going on? Why? And how can I fix it??

Vague789 wrote:
Set your track numbers correctly (by right clicking, clinking 'Get Info' and clicking on the info tab), and make sure you also set the totals (e.g. 12 of 18 - the "of 18" is what I mean by the totals). This sorted it out on my iPod.
This worked for me for my Teaching Company files. They were all jumbled previously because they took the track numbers from the default import from the internet. Once I changed it, no problem.
It would be better if Apple allowed just a dragging, or if there was a quick tool, but at least this works.
I had previously been using "Join Together" for stuff like this. I think I like this method better, though. I can still keep the individual lecture files on a playlist, but not have to worry about all the separate titles in a general listing.

Incorrect sort order of rows in Purchase Order based on Sales Order

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for