Missing Functionality: Dunning Wizard - We need table CRD1

Hello,
Missing Functionality: Dunning Wizard - We need table CRD1 in the dunning PLD templates!!!
This Workaround is impossible.
As a workaround I suggest to store this information in the UDFs that you would create on the OCRD table that is exposed in the dunning PLD templates.

keine Antwort ist auch eine Antwort

Similar Messages

Why need to give Function group at time of table maintence generation

Dear All,
why need to give Function group at time of table maintence generation
Regards,
Laxman Sankhla

Hi Laxman,
The F1 help of the field says:
Name of the function group, to which the generated maintenance modules will belong.
Means the PBO & PAI modules of the screen will be created under this Functio group.
Regards
DKS

Dunning wizard - Finance charge

Hello,
I ran the dunning wizard and printed out the dunning letter. Even though the interest is being calculated correctly [TtlopnIntr column in DWZ2 table], it does not update the BP Account Balance. Also when printing out the report, the Amount Due column in the report shows the open sum and not open sum + interest. At the BP level, I have activated the Include Interest checkbox and put in the bank interest percentages.
Could you please advise ASAP.
OR
If there is any other way to handle finance charges, please advise.
Thanks & Regards,
Bhavita
Edited by: Darius Heydarian on Mar 26, 2008 5:22 PM

Bhavita,
I'm running into the same problem also. Check out SAP note 1059948.
Symptom
When using the Dunning Wizard there has been an interest and a fee per letter defined. However, after running the wizard and printing the dunning letter with interest and a fee added to the total, it is not possible to find this balance in the business partner balance.
Other terms
business partner balance, journal entry, credit, debit, missing information, dunning level
Reason and Prerequisites
SAP Business One Functionality
A Dunning Letter has successfully been created and printed with an interest, a fee or both.
Solution
The interest/fee that is printed on the Dunning Letter will not make an entry on any account. It is only printed. If the interest/fee is paid, it should be recorded manually in the system. This is a system definition.
I have 30K plus customers - 500 of which have overdue amounts... am I supposed to manually create journal entries for all customers now? This is the dumbest thing I have ever seen in any software program ever! Don't make it look like you support a business process in a software solution when you don't. I have no idea how I'm going to try and explain this one to my customer...

Sorting of Dunning Wizard and Payment Wizard

Dear Development,
we have the following business situation.
1) We create a Dunning Wizard or Payment Wizard.
2) We make a printout of all selected business partner and documents in Step 5 of the DW or PW.
3) The chief decides which payments should be done.
4) We have to unslect or select the checkboxes again.
5) The problem is now, it is quite difficult to find out the correct business partner related to the printout.
We need a filter functionality or a sorting algorithm for all columns. Thanks a lot for your help.
Regards Chris

Hello Chris,
Thank you for your input. It's quite clear and reasonable. Unfortunately, sorting and filtering feature is quite difficult to implement on multi-level/hierachical grids in SAP Business One; for the time being, this logic is not supported but we will consider it for one of the next major releases.
I guess ideally the 'Find' control could help better. That we can consider as well. What do you think?
Peter Dominik
B1 Solution Management

Packaging data is not saved in document draft (missing functionality)

Dear all,
Packaging data, usually typed with delivery note, is not saved together with Delivery Note draft (No matter the draft is saved manually or automatically by approval procedure).
I have tested on SBO 2005B latest patch, 2007B latest patch, and 8.8 version, they all do not save packaging data in draft.
The draft related tables for packaging (DRF7, DRF8) are already existed in SBO, I encourage to get this missing functionality back.
My customers are highly needed for this function for better operation flow.
It would be appreciated if this request could be implemented in the near future patch.
Thanks in advance

Have also just discovered that this functionality is missing, although we were going to be using it when saving an AR Invoice as Draft. This is a major hole and is going to cause a big issue for a current implementation where this method was going to be used to create 'Split Deliveries' without making the account postings and allow Despatch paperwork for the Shipping company to be printed. The solution was going to be extremely simple, but now potentially is going to result in a substantial SDK development.
It would be useful to know whether there is any likelihood that it will be resolved in the near future, i.e. in a patch for 2007A SP1 or 8.8.

OWB bugs, missing functionality and the future of OWB

I'm working with OWB for some time now and there are a lot of rough edges to discover. Functionality and stability leave a lot to be desired. Here's a small and incomplete list of things that annoy me:
Some annoying OWB bugs (OWB 10g 10.1.0.2.0):
- The debugger doesn't display the output parameters of procedures called in pre-mapping processes (displays nothing, treats values as NULL). The mapping itself works fine though.
- When calling selfmade functions within an expression OWB precedes the function call with a constant "Functions." which prevents the function from being executed and results in an error message
- Occasionally OWB cannot open mappings and displays an error message (null pointer exception). In this case the mapping cannot be opened anymore.
- Occasionally when executing mappings OWB doesn't remember changes in mappings even when the changes were committed and deployed
- When using aggregators in mappings OWB scrambles the order of the output attributes
- The deployment of mappings sometimes doesn't work. After n retries it works without having changed anything in the mapping
- When recreating an external table directly after dropping the table OWB recreates the external table but always displays both an error message and a success message.
- In Key Lookups the screen always gets garbled when selecting an attribute as a join condition
- Usage of constants results in aborts in the debugger
- When you reconcile a table used in a key lookup the lookup condition sometimes changes. OWB seems to remember only the position of the lookup condition attribute but not the name.
- In the process of validating a mapping often changes in the mapping get lost and errors occur like 'Internal Errors' or 'Null Pointer Exceptions'.
- When you save the definition of external tables OWB always adds 2 whitespace columns to the beginning of all the lines following 'ORGANISATION EXTERNAL'. If you save a lot of external table definitions you get files with hundreds of leading whitespaces.
Poor or missing functionality:
- No logging on the level of single records possible. I'd like the possibility to see the status of each single record in each operator like using 'verbose data' in PowerCenter
- The order of the attributes cannot be changed. This really pisses me off expecially if operators like the aggregator scramble the order of attributes.
- No variables in expressions possible
- Almost unusable lookup functionality (no cascading lookups, no lookup overrides, no unconnected lookups, only equal condition in key lookups)
- No SQL overrides in soruces possible
- No mapplets, shared containers or any kind a reusable transformations
- No overview functionality for mappings. Often it's very hard to find a leftover operator in a big mapping.
- No copy function for attributes
- Printing functionality is completely useless
- No documentation functionality for mappings (reports)
- Debugger itself needs debugging
- It's very difficult to mark connections between attributes of different operations. It's almost impossible to mark a group of connections without marking connections you don't want to mark.
I really wonder which of the above bugs and mssing functionality 'Paris' will address. From what I read about 'Paris' not many if at all. If Oracle really wants to be a competitor (with regard to functionality) to Informatica, IBM/Ascential etc. they have a whole lot of work to do or purchase Informatica or another of the leading etl tool
vendors.
What do you think about OWB? Will it be a competitor for the leading etl tools or just a cheap database add on and become widely used like SAB BW not for reasons of technology or functionality but because it's cheap?
Looking forward to your opinions.
Jörg Menker

Thanks to you two for entertaining my thoughts so far. Let me respond to you latest comments.
Okay, lets not argue which one is better.. when a tool is there .. then there are some reasons to be there...But the points raised by Jorg and me are really very annoying. Overall I agree with both yours and Jorg's points (and I did not think it was an argument...merely sharing our observations with each other (;^)
The OWB tool is not as mature as Informatica. However, Informatica has no foothold in the database engine itself and as I mentioned earlier, is still "on the outside looking in..." The efficiency and power of set-based activity versus row-based activity is substantial.
Looking at it from another way lets take a look at Microstrategy as a way of observing a technical strategy for product development. Microstrategy focused on the internals (the engine) and developed it into the "heavy-lifting" tool in the industry. It did this primarily by leveraging the power of the backend...the database and the hosting server. For sheer brute force, it was champion of the day. It was less concerned with the pretty presentation and more concerned with getting the data out of the back-end so the user didn't have to sit there for a day and wait. Now they have begun to focus on the presentation part.
Likewise this seems to be the strategy that Oracle has used for OWB. It is designed around the database engine and leverages the power of the database to do its work. Informatica (probably because it needs to be all things to all people) has tended to view the technical offerings of the database engine as a secondary consideration in its architectural approach and has probably been forced to do so more now that Oracle has put themselves in direct competition with Informatica. To do otherwise would make their product too complex to maintain and more vendor-specific.
I am into the third data warehousing/data migration project and my previous two have been on Informatica (3 years on it).I respect your experience and your opinions...you are not a first timer. The tasks we have both had to solve and how we solved them with these tools are not necessarily the same. Could be similar in instances; could be quite different.
So the general tendency is to evaluate the tool and try to see how things that were needed to be done in my previous projects can be done with this tool. I am afraid to say .. I am still not sure how these can be implemented in OWB. The points raised by us are probably the fall out of this deficiency.One observation that I would make is that in my experience, calls to the procedural language in the database engine have tended to perform very poorly with Informatica. Informatica's scripting language is week. Therefore, if you do not have direct usability of a good, strong procedural language to tackle some complicated tasks, then you will be in a pickle when the solution is not well suited to a relational-based approach. Informatica wants you to do most things outside of the database (in the map primarily). It is how you implement the transformation logic. OWB is built entirely around the relational, procedural, and ETL components in the Oracle database engine. That is what the tool is all about.
If cost is the major factor for deciding a tool then OWB stands far ahead...Depends entirely on the client and the situation. I have implemented solutions for large companies and small companies. I don't use a table saw to cut cake and I don't use a pin knife to fall trees. Right tool for the right job.
...thats what most managers do .. without even looking how in turn by selecting such a tool they make the life tough for the developers.Been there many times. Few non-technical managers understand the process of tool evaluation and selection and the value a good process adds to the project. Nor do they understand the implications of making a bad choice (cost, productivity, maintainability).
The functionality of OWB stands way below Informatica.If you are primarily a GUI-based implementer that is true. However, I have often found that when I have been brought in to fix performance problems with Informatica implementations that the primary problem is usually with the way that the developer implemented it. Too often I have found that the developer understands how to implement logic in the GUI component (the Designer/Maps and Sessions) with a complete lack of understanding of how all this activity will impact load performance (they don't understand how the database engine works.) For example, a strong feature in Informatica is the ability to override the default SQL statement generated by Informatica. This was a smart design decision on Informatica's part. I have frequently had to go into the "code" and fix bad joins, split up complex operations, and rip out convoluted logic to get the maps to perform within a reasonable load window. Too often these developers are only viewing the problem through the "window" of the tool. They are not stepping back and look at the problem in the context of the overall architecture. In part Informatica forces them to do this. Another possible factor is they probably don't know better.
"One tool...one solution"
Microstrategy until recently had been suffering from that same condition of not allowing the developer to create the actual query). OWB engineers need to rethink their strategy on overriding the SQL.
The functionality of OWB stands way below Informatica.In some ways yes. If you do a head-to-head comparison of the GUI then yes. In other ways OWB is better (Informatica does not measure up when you compare it with all of the architectural features that the Oracle database engine offers). They need to fix the bugs and annoyances though.
.. but even the GUI of Informatica is better than OWB and gives the developer some satisfaction of working in it.Believe me I feel your pain. On the other hand, I have suffered from Informatica bugs. Ever do a port from one database eingine to another just to have it convert everything into multi-byte? Ever have it re-define your maps to parallel processing threads when you didn't ask it to?
Looking at the technical side of things I can give you one fine example ... there is no function in Oracle doing to_integer (to_number is there) but Informatica does that ... Hmm-m-m...sorry, I don't get the point.
The style of ETL approach of Informatica is far more appealing.I find it unnecessarily over-engineered.
OWB has two advantages : It is basically free of cost and it has a big brother in Oracle.
It is basically free of cost...When you are another "Microsoft", you can throw your weight around. The message for Informatica is "don't bite the hand that feeds you." Bad decisions at the top.
Regards,
Dan Phillips

Dunning wizard print layout issue.

Hi every one
I need some help regarding the dunning wizard layout. Iu2019m having an issue where the last line in layout duplicates itself 4-6 times. The weird thing is that first lines are fine but only the last one that does it.
Kind regards
Søren

Hi
I solved the problem. But the issue was when i ran the dunning wizard the layouts messed up. For example if I had a dunning letter with 3 lines (overdue documents). The last line would copy itself 4-6 times (it would show the last document 4-6times so the total lines in the dunning letter would be 7-9 lines). But I solve the issue. Somehow the attention person (which I got from the contact persons (ocrp) and not from the document contact person (oinv) ) did the issue. When i switch it to the oinv the issue was gone.
kind regards
Søren
Edited by: Bundgaard Søren Hollænder on Jan 26, 2009 9:56 AM

Dunning wizard print layout

hi there
i am interested in the dunning wizard to modify it in order to bring me the results from the OCQG table
to be more specific, i have modified the Dunning All printout but i cannot bring the property name of the customer that exists in the Properties tab(it is checked)
do you have any idea how can i bring this data to the prinout?
thanks in advance
Vasilis

Hi Vasilis,
Property tab info is too hard to be available to PLD. The link is too weak because there are 64 individual fields to represent each property.
Thanks,
Gordon

Dunning wizard question

Client is running SAP B1 2007 PL 41.
Step 3/6 in Dunning Wizard: Business Partners - Selection Criteria
Issue - no business partners are able to be added to table that displays BP Code and BP Name. Using the standard 30/60/90 dunning terms and customers should be showing up in this table judging by the customer receivables aging report where there are many customer entries in the 31-60; 61-90; 91-120 categories.
When trying to add customers to this table in the dunning wizard, I simply click the 'Add' button and then 'OK' in order to potentially select all the customers - but none show up.
Anyone have any ideas? Each customer does have a unique credit limit...
Thanks,
Paul

Hi Paul,
Is this client recently upgrade to PL41?
If it works before upgrade, you have to check all their setting to ensure if the dunning terms are still working.
Thanks,
Gordon

Problem with Dunning wizard

After the excution of Dunning wizard, I get the following error :
18/03/2009 19:06:51: Could not commit transaction '' (DWZ2)
Now,
I don't see the register dunning transaction, but all the business partner has been signed has dunned.
I need know to understand what is my problem and this error, and to restore back the situation to the time before the error.
Giuseppe

HI,
The error message is typically caused by approval procedures. Could you
please ask the customer to try the following:
1. Check the approval templates.
2. Log on with the approver user (designed approver in the template).
3. Go to the Approval Templates Setup window, Terms tab.
4. If the radio button 'when the following applies' is checked, please
check if any box was checked on the 'Choose' column and if the Ratio
'Undefined type' is selected. If so, either select a ratio and define
a value, or uncheck the box.
5. Check the last line in the Terms tab ('Undefined type') and make sure
it is not checked.
6. Click on Update.
If the above does not solve the issue, then this may be related to Note
1258519 which is an application error fixed in 2007A, P44.
Also there is a workaround on the Note 1258519.
Regards
Vikas
SAP Business One Forums Team

Dunning Wizard - Adding customers not working

Hi all,
We're trying to run the dunning wizard, but are unable to add customers in step three. There are no error messages. The BP Properties dialogue box appears when the 'Add' button is clicked, we can select customers , but when 'OK' is clicked, no customers appear in the list. If we click 'Next', it says 'no customers were selected' in the system messages. I have attempted this user the manager account, and another colleague has tried it with the same results and he has superuser.
Cheers,
Nick
B1 8.08

Hi,
You need to check every customer profile to see whether Dunning Term field in Business Partner Master Data >> Payment Term Tab is defined or not. Make sure assign with dunning term.
Your problem will be solved.
Hope this helps,
TVSon

Dunning Wizard - Interest calculated

Hi Experts,
The interest tjhat the dunning wizard calculates on a specific BP, How does it get allocated to that BP balance? i.e does it automatically get added to the BP balance or do you need to go post it manually via journal entry or what?
Thank you.
Kind Regards,

Hi,
You can check Note No. : 1059948 regarding the issue mentioned by you where the your enquiry is clarified.
Hope it helps.
Kind Regards,
Jitin
SAP Business One Forum Team

Dunning Wizard Layout

Hello!
This problem have been buggering me for a while. At my company we have recently started remaking all of our print layouts for the company and since we are using v8.8 we are using crystal reports. Now this works good for regular documents (such as invoices orders etc) but i cant get it to work with the Dunning Wizard. Regularly i use the DocKey@ token to retrive what document to show but the dunning wizard doesnt seem to recognize it.
Any ideas what other token it may be? or any other solution maybe`
Edit: to clarify, what i need to know is, if anyone have made their own Dunning letter layout in SAPB1 and if so, how did you get the dunningwizard to recognize the "key" from SAP?
Regards Mikael
Edited by: Mikael Gullberg on Apr 16, 2010 3:38 PM

Hi
I solved the problem. But the issue was when i ran the dunning wizard the layouts messed up. For example if I had a dunning letter with 3 lines (overdue documents). The last line would copy itself 4-6 times (it would show the last document 4-6times so the total lines in the dunning letter would be 7-9 lines). But I solve the issue. Somehow the attention person (which I got from the contact persons (ocrp) and not from the document contact person (oinv) ) did the issue. When i switch it to the oinv the issue was gone.
kind regards
Søren
Edited by: Bundgaard Søren Hollænder on Jan 26, 2009 9:56 AM

Dunning Wizard "To" Date

Currently the Dunning wizard has no "To" Date. Dunning is calculated to "Today's" Date. With a separate "To" Date, it would be possible to run the Dunning Wizard on a different date, than the date up to which you wish to Dunn. (This could for instance also influence total interest calculation)

What is the business case that you will need "To" date to simulate the dunning letter? Do you want them to be pre-printed in order to save anything?
Thanks,
Gordon

Dunning Wizard interest in BP currency

SAP 2007A.
Local currency is CAD.
Some customer's currency is USD.
Is there a when to run the dunning wizard and have SAP calculate the interest in the BP currency instead of the local currency?
In the Dunning Terms Setup window there are check boxes to select b/w original exchange rate of the invoice and exchange rate of the wizard run. So it makes sense that SAP B1 should be able to calculate the interes in the BP currency.
Also, tabla DWZ2 has field IntrstCurr (Interest currency) , which would indicate that the table is prepared to store an interest amount in a currency other than the local.

In order to calculate dunning interest in the BP currency, the dunning term has to be set up to use "Current Exchange Rate"

Missing Functionality: Dunning Wizard - We need table CRD1

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for