TO_Number Function showing wrong values

Hi All,
I am passing a Char value from oracle forms to oracle reports as parameter.
In Report Query I'm converting the char value into number for comparison using TO_NUMBER() function. As the char value is large value like '001002004006004' it is converting to something like 1.2e+12 and my query results goes wrong. I want value, something like 1002004006004( as initial 00 will be removed).
I'm using Oracle forms 10g and Reports 10g
Can anyone please help me.
Thanks
Sandeep
----Don't think outside the box, Think as if there is no Box at all.

Hi, Sandeep,
Whenever you have a problem, post a little sample data (CREATE TABLE and INSERT statements) that shows what the problem is, and the correct results you want from that sample data. Explain how you get those results from that data.
See the forum FAQ: https://forums.oracle.com/message/9362002#9362002
Don't confuse how a number is displayed with what that number is. SQL*Plus (and other front ends), by default, allows only 10 character spaces for displaying NUMBERs. If you have a NUMBER that doesn't fit into 10 spaces, then SQL*Plus will round the digits after the decimal point. If it still doesn't fit (which is the case with 1002004006004) then SQL*Plus will use scientific notation, rounding the decimal places. The actual value (at least 38 significant digits) will be used in all computations, regardless of how the NUMBER is displayed. I doubt if what you posted has anything to do with the real problem.

Similar Messages

Issue: - FBL1N - is showing wrong values

Issue: - FBL1N - is showing wrong values
Hi SAP experts,
We are executing T Code FBL1N and selecting all open enteries, and select all items like special normal items, G/L Transaction, noted items, parked items and customer items, we found that the balance is showing wrong for intercompany vendors.
For Ex, if vendor is not created in company Code A and customer items are available in Company Code A then that items are coming for some line items and for some line items it is not?
I have attached one example for the same. for all vendors data is coming properly but for indivisual vendor is it not.
Please suggest why?
Regards,
Vijay

Example :
Vendor number 99 ans for the same customer nO is C12 is created in company code ABC but vendor is not created and customer C12 is in PQR, now i am executing fbl1n for Company Code PQR for open item selecting all options like normal items, special G/L transaction, customer items noted items and parked items, the line items related to Vendor number 99 for company Code PQR should not display, as vendor is not created but customer items are there, please let me know for some cases it is showing result and in same cases it is not why?
Regards,
Vijay

Updated CODE1 is showing wrong values in 2LIS_05_QE1

Hi all,
I'm using 2LIS_05_QE1 extractor to report over qualitative data in BW. When the code of the characteristics is updated, the extractor takes 2 records, before and after images. The extractor is gathering wrong values for the CODE1 field in the before image.
REQUEST     DATAPAKID     RECORD     ROCANCEL     PPLNKN     MERKNR     CODE1     GRUPPE1     ZHLNSTAT
REQU_4KVR0APSV0RSZ7N70IOR0F95L     1     5120          5     40     0     CIBAU038     1
REQU_4KPIA4UG5G1IKN6DE3XFWKIS9             3     4045     X     5     40     0     CIBAU038     -1
REQU_4KPIA4UG5G1IKN6DE3XFWKIS9             3     4046          5     40     75     CIBAU038     1
REQU_4KYF8YNIEMXNZI7P2Y5BM21W9     3     4045     X     5     40     0     CIBAU038     -1
REQU_4KYF8YNIEMXNZI7P2Y5BM21W9     3     4046          5     40     75     CIBAU038     1
We have changed the characteristic two times, now we can see two of the before images with the ROCANCEL field marked with = 'X'. The problem appears in the second before image which is not taking the actual value of the CODE1 field (75), instead is showing the value in zero. Then, when I report over the key figure in the table above ZHLNSTAT (quantity of values) the results are showing 2 values for CODE1=75 and -1 values for CODE1=0.
Any ideas?

I have checked Datasource and CODE1 is not a hidden field...apart from this field there are other fields too which I can see in Datasource in R/3 about dont see them in BW ....
Please let me know what could be wrong.
Thanks,
Murtuza.
Edited by: Murtuza Morwala on Jun 27, 2009 7:36 AM

Color picker on Illustrator CC 2014 shows wrong values

See the image above . The selected area filled color is e6e6e6 ( 230, 230, 230 ) but the color picker shows the wrong value 4d4d4d. Its happens only on Illustrator , What is this actually is there any problem with the color mode settings ? Please help me

You misunderstand me, so don’t be too quick to judge.
I said that the Color panel was more efficient than the Color Picker. It has sliders so that you can adjust colours precisely as you wish first time, rather than just groping somewhere on a big area of colour in the Picker and then having to make fine numerical adjustments afterwards (plus an OK when you’re done).
The Color panel is particularly useful when you are working in CMYK because it ensures that you get clean mixtures when you want them (which the Picker does not, without fine tweaking afterwards).
And if you want to get shades of the same colour, you simply hold down Shift as you drag one of the sliders.
In conjunction with the Swatches panel, I would go for the Color panel any time, but if you prefer the Picker that’s quite all right by me.

Saptranshost profile parameter showing wrong value

Hi Expert,
We are using EHP6 with sybase database on windows platform
We get stuck while configuring stms.
After working more on same issue we found that "DIR_TRANS" parameter showing wrong path in AL11 tx.
"DIR_TRANS = \stats\sapmnt\trans"
The correct value should "DIR_TRANS = \sapprd\sapmnt\trans"
(Wrong host name showing in path as "stats" where it should be "sapprd" )
After changing the value in profile parameter "SAPTRANSHOST" from RZ10 tx as "SAPPRD" issue get resolved.
When I checked profile parameter "SAPTRANSHOST" from RZ10 in production system, its showing me following value:
>>Unsubstituted standard value: STATS
>>Substituted standard value: STATS
Same I checked in Development system and showing as below:
>>Unsubstituted standard value: $(SAPGLOBALHOST)
>>Substituted standard value: SAPDEV
My question is why "SAPTRANSHOST" profile parameter showing "Unsubstitued standard value" as "STATS" where is should be "$(SAPGLOBALHOST)"
Sap not allowed to change the same. Only allowed "Parameter Val" in RZ10 tx.
How to change "stats" as "$(SAPGLOBALHOST)" and what can be possible reason as value showing stats.
Regards.
Dev

HI

After casting double to float debugger shows wrong value

Hi,
My colleaque found an interesting behaviour with Java debugger. I have made some tests and here are the results:
Test code:
double dNum = 43.680659;
float fNum = (float) dNum;
System.out.println("double number = " + dNum);
System.out.println("float number = " + fNum);This is tested in Eclipse IDE 3.4.2 with following Java JRE versions:
- 1.4.2_19
- 1.5.0_14
- 1.6.0_10
And following JDK:
- jdk1.5.0_16
Eclipse IDE will show following values for variables in all platforms:
dNum = 43.680659
fNum = 43.74316Console will print:
double number = 43.680659
float number = 43.68066Testing also with command line debugger jdb. Java JRE version:
- 1.4.2_19
And following JDK:
- jdk1.5.0_16
Results are the same as in Eclipse IDE. Is there a bug in debugger environment?

I managed to find bug report of this issue:
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6807341
Information:
Bug ID : 6807341
Synopsis : JDWP: float value reported incorrectly
Category : java:debugger
State : 3-Accepted, bug
Priority : 4-Low
Submit Date: 19-FEB-2009

Standard program showing wrong values in ALV report

Hi All,
Standard Report 'RFBILA00' (Balance sheet P+L Statement) ,when i excute for classical list the output showing correct.
But with the same test data when i run for ALV Grid control showing wrong valuse like.
with same company code comparision year,comparision period ,comp periods...when i run classical list:
PROFIT/LOSS BEFORE TAXATION                                 5,194,871.12-
RETAINED PROFIT/LOSS FOR THE PERIOD                    5,194,871.12-
NET PROFIT/(LOSS)                                                        5,194,871.12.
when i run in ALV for same above data, the result is:
PROFIT/LOSS BEFORE TAXATION                           9,307,137.09
RETAINED PROFIT/LOSS FOR THE PERIOD              5,194,871.12-
NET PROFIT/(LOSS)                                                 22,076,715.82.
Please help on this....and this is standard report.. y its showing different for same data.
Thank you
Anu.

Hi ,
Same program excuted once by selecting classical list is showing correct. And with same data excuted with ALV grid list showing wrong valuse.
when selected with Classical list: for company code:8000,Reporting periods: 1-9,Reporting year:2009,Comparison periods:1-8
Comparison year-2009.
PROFIT/LOSS BEFORE TAXATION 5,194,871.12-
RETAINED PROFIT/LOSS FOR THE PERIOD 5,194,871.12-
NET PROFIT/(LOSS) 5,194,871.12.
when i run in ALV for same above data, the result is: for company code:8000,Reporting periods: 1-9,Reporting year:2009,Comparison periods:1-8 Comparison year-2009.
PROFIT/LOSS BEFORE TAXATION 9,307,137.09
RETAINED PROFIT/LOSS FOR THE PERIOD 5,194,871.12-
NET PROFIT/(LOSS) 22,076,715.82.
Thank You,
Anu.

DatePicker shows wrong value on initial loading

I have a column with a date picker, to make the content of the column editable.
oCdColumn = new sap.ui.table.Column({
            label: "Übergabe",
            template: new sap.ui.commons.DatePicker({
                value: {
                    path: "CD",
                    formatter: function (sDate) {
                        var date = new Date(parseInt(sDate));
                        console.log(date)
                        return date;
                locale: "de",
                change: [oController.onDateFieldChange, oController]
            sortProperty: "CD"
The value I get from the path CD is in the format you get when you call .getTime() on a Date.
On initial loading the datepicker displays some dates that are like 6 years after the date that should be displayed. When i navigate to another table page/ change the sort order and then navigate back/change the order to initial value the date is displayed correctly.
How is this possible?

Hi Frank,
as you can see I logged the Formatter Output. It never showed me an incorrect date. I think parseInt of null returns NaN. When NaN was the Output of theFormatter the DatePicker showed the current Date.
I stepped through and for the first 5 lines (which is the default value for a table page) it put a correct Date in the table, the other values i can't see because the table page was full, but the console showed a correct date. After it finished running through all the formatters the
visibleRowCountMode: sap.ui.table.VisibleRowCountMode.Auto
was triggered and the dates were wrong.
Thanks for the link with the type system. I tried it yesterday, but it gave me an undefined is not a function error. My mistake was that i just set the pattern and not the source pattern. When I set the source pattern to "timestamp" it worked. Thank you.
For anyone who runs in the same problem: i would also recommend this link: sap.ui.model.Date
Regards,
Judith

SUM function resulting WRONG values when some cell contains a string

A very strange problem that can result in wrong financial calculations and big mistakes...
If we have SUM function for some range of cells and one of them is treated as text string (I mean it's number in fact but Number is sure it's text string). than SUM function calulates ALL cells except this sell silently without errors and results in wrong result.
For example we have cells and values
A B
=====
1| 15 USD
2| 0 USD
3| 37 USD
4| 1 USD
5| 3 USD
here the function SUM(B1:B5) should provide the result "56 USD"
But if cell B5 is treated as text string (it can be still displayed as "3 USD" so we don't know it's treated as text string for some reason) than SUM(B1:B5) swill answer "53 USD".
The problem is we DON'T know cell B5 is treated as text and we are fully sure that we have the correct sum of all 5 cells, in reality we see sum of 4 cells only....
I think anybody working with financial or other important data can imagine how dangerous this SUM behaviour is.... I encountered several times that when importing data from Excel or by other ways numbers are imported as text strings. So if I have a lot of cells I'm not sure if all those cells are correctly styled or some of them for some unknown reason is treated as text string.
In Microsoft Excel there is a very right solution. In MS Excel if any cell in the SUM is wrong format the SUM function simply provides error as a result. But in Numbers SUM doesn't tell us about error, it simply provides us with a wrong result!
With formal logic the way SUM works in Numbers is total idiotism. If I ask to SUM B1:B5 than I definitely ask to sum ALL 5 cells, not 4, not 3, not 6 but 5 definite cells. If Numbers can't sum those exactly those 5 cells the only answer of the function should be ERROR.
But Apple Numbers answers me some result of summing those cells that it's able to sum. Apple Numbers SUM function is not confused that I asked for SUM of 5 (not 4 or 3) cells and I expect to have this sum as a result.
In fact Apple uses the right logic when we use another formula. If we use =B1B2+B3+B4B5 and any cell contains text string that we'll have error result the sam as in Microsoft Excel. So in this example Numbers behaves correctly.
So why SUM (B1:B5) can provide totally different result as =B1B2+B3+B4B5?

alexb2 wrote:
So when I set format for my number as my local currency it's displayed as 123 XXX (XXX is my currency but it's not in latin). I see it's not only displayed but also stored as 123 XXX. That's different from Excel that stores only numbers in cells and shows number with prefix or suffix - Numbers storex number with prefix or suffix.
No, you get this behavior because the original sheet is displaying values as currencies. I assumes that the import process pass it as a string because he doesn't recognize it as a currency value. As far as I know, Numbers stores the currency entries as a pure number and an indicator of the used currency.
Here is an example.
(a) the description of the numerical value (I underlined it: 456)
<sf:number-cell sf:flags="4" sf:value="456" sf:col="1" sf:row="2">
<sf:cell-style-ref sfa:IDREF="SFTCellStyle-46"/>
<sf:content-size sfa:w="58.659881591796875" sfa:h="14"/>
</sf:number-cell>
(b) the description of the format (I underlined the used currency: XAM)
<sf:cell-style sfa:ID="SFTCellStyle-46" sf:cell-style-default-line-height="12" sf:parent-ident="tabular-Basic-body-cell-style-id">
<sf:property-map>
<sf:SFTCellStylePropertyNumberFormat>
<sf:number-format sfa:ID="SFTNumberFormat-23" sf:format-type="1" sf:format-string="#,##0.00 ¤;-#,##0.00 ¤" sf:format-decimal-places="2" sf:format-currency-code="XAM" sf:format-negative-style="0" sf:format-show-thousands-separator="true" sf:format-fraction-accuracy="-3" sf:format-use-accounting-style="false"/>
</sf:SFTCellStylePropertyNumberFormat>
<sf:SFTCellStylePropertyImplicitFormatType>
<sf:number sfa:number="256" sfa:type="i"/>
</sf:SFTCellStylePropertyImplicitFormatType>
<sf:SFTCellStylePropertyFormatType>
<sf:number sfa:number="257" sfa:type="i"/>
</sf:SFTCellStylePropertyFormatType>
</sf:property-map>
</sf:cell-style>
Of course, if the original currency string is not recognized, it can't be described as such a feature and the value is treated as a simple string.
So may be at some moment my 123 XXX is treated like string value.
Yes, find and replace is a nice tool when importing data - thanks for the tip. the last problem is with already Numbers files that were imported not today (or even createde as Numbers file) where some cell becomes string value after some editing.
Here again, if you edit a currency string and replace it to a not recognized one, the result will be logically a string.
There is an other way to give this result:
copy a value from a cell formatted as XAM currency (just an example)
paste it in a cell whose format is currency Euro (once again it's just an example).
The result will be a string.
The culprit is not the program, it's the user.
I had several times this situation and last time I found error only because I have my budget in 2 programs - in Numbers and in another special budgeting program. As each program has advantages I have in fact 2 instances of the same budget.
And when I changed some string in Numbers and another program I noticed the sum is different. I was sure it's another program somewhere buggy but noticed than Numbers simply ignores one of the budget strings and sums without it... In fact it was even not the string I changed, I remember I changed the buggy string about a week ago but I haven't compared budgets that time so my budget had a mistake for some time till I noticed it. If I used only Numbers without copy of budget in another program may be even today I won't notice the mistake.
The same situation happened not once.
I think that the choice made by Apple for SUM() is correct. You feel that it is wrong. It's useless to debate more, we will not change the behavior of the function.
I try to give a workaround.
The neater one is to add columns as I described in my first response.
The given formula will clearly flag cells which aren't containing numerical values. If you move the SUM from the original range to the new one, the oddities will be flagged automatically.
Here is an alternate workaround:
The currency is XAM.
In B4 I introduced a typo so the value is no longer a numerical one.
Given that, the sum in the footer doesn't count the 34 (which is the normal behavior).
In column C1 I entered =1*B
which flagged the bad cell.
The alternate is to use an auxiliary table like aux1
In A1 I entered:
=IF(ISERROR(INDIRECT(ADDRESS(ROW(),COLUMN(),,,"main"))),"",IF(ISBLANK(INDIRECT(A DDRESS(ROW(),COLUMN(),,,"main"))),"",1*INDIRECT(ADDRESS(ROW(),COLUMN(),,,"main") )))
Exactly the same formula in B1, C1, D1, …
So, the table will automatically grab the contents of the main table (just take care to insert more columns in aux1 than in main)
In the footer row of aux1, insert a sum formula for columns where there is required.
Looking at this footer will flag columns where a value may be "wrong" so, it will be necessary (but easy) to scan the column's content to find the red triangle(s).
Yvan KOENIG (from FRANCE lundi 13 octobre 2008 13:27:40)

Report Painter report showing wrong values

Hi,
We have a report painter report Y_DN3_47000280 which is Inventory by Plant. We have a plant which is sold out and is not working anymore under the company. But the report is still showing postings and values in tune of 183000...Can you please advise what is wrong and what setting is missing?
Thanks,
Prithwi.

Hi Dianne,
Thanks for the details. We checked MBEW table. There's a mismatch of the values between MBEW and Y_DN3_47000280 report. MBEW contains $109.6 and the Y_DN3_47000280 report contains $180333.00 for the plant.
Can you pls tell from where these values are populating. The plant has been closed 3 months back.
Thanks,
Prithwi.

Key Figures With Hide can be shown showing wrong values when displayed in a query

Hi Experts,
I have a qiery with two structures in the column(cell Definition) three key figures are displayed and the rest are all hide can be displayed. However whenever i display one of the hidden key figures along with one displayed key figures it initially shoes incorrect values. Once i add another key figure (which has status always show) the hidden jey figure value gets corrected. Is it a problem with the structure? Kindly assist.For example when i display the actuals(always show) and actuals rate(hide can be shown) the values for actuals rate are wrong , however when i add the plan rate(always ahow) the values for actual rate gets corrected. Screenshots for structures below.

Hi Sayanto,
For this I would recommend you to check the Key figure definition in all 3 situations.
1. original display
2. display of hidden KF
3. Display of existing KF
I suspect that cell references may have some effect on the calculation as you are adding the hidden KF in analyzer directly. You can prove this only by checking Key figure definition.
Please let me know if you are facing any issue in getting the Key figure definition itself.
Also, as Cornelia suggested check if you have any constant selection applied to any of your KFs.
Hope this helps.
-Swati.

F.19 report showing wrong values (GR/IR)

Hello,
At my company, they run the MR11 to check for GR/IR variances and then clear these variances using the F.13 transaction. However, when the F.19 transaction is run to analyze the GR/IR clearing account, there are some old PO's belonging to year 2005/2006 that still show up in the report. When these PO's are checked, there is no GR/IR variance.
Could someone please explain the reason for this and if there is any way to remove these entries from the F.19 report?
Thanks in advance,
Rugmani.

Hi,
This is the wrong forum for this
Rgds,
Richard

IT 2001 shows wrong value

Daily working hour is 9hrs (1 hour unpaid break), so actually it's 8hrs.
but when i mark 9-1pm leave (4hrs), it shows 0.44 days leave instead of 0.50 days.
What could be the reason?
in wsr i tried with 9 hr and 8 hr also, but no changes.

r us sure u created only one break schedule, check and let me know.
go and check what ur dws shows, is it shows correct 8 hrs or more (i believe it's 9. That's y it takes 50% of 9 hrs). if more u might have created more break schedules.
In that case u wont get correct value in 2001

Julian day function Converting wrong values

Hi All
Please chek I am giving the command to convert the number value to words and I am getting wrong output. Please advise. This is urgent.
The Command I am giving is
select to_char(to_date('30540','J'),'JSP') from dual;
The return I am getting is
THIRTY THOUSAND FIFTY-FOUR.
My Database is Oracle 7.3

Again
SQL> select to_char(to_date('30540','J'),'JSP') from dual;
TO_CHAR(TO_DATE('30540','J'),'JSP'
THIRTY THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED FORTY
Message was edited by:
jeneesh

GR/IR clearing account showing wrong values (F.19)

Hello,
At my company, they run the MR11 to check for GR/IR variances and then clear these variances using the F.13 transaction. However, when the F.19 transaction is run to analyze the GR/IR clearing account, there are some old PO's belonging to year 2005/2006 that still show up in the report. When these PO's are checked, there is no GR/IR variance.
Could someone please explain the reason for this and if there is any way to remove these entries from the F.19 report?
Thanks in advance,
Rugmani.

Yes, you can do F.19 in month 6.
The posting will happen on the posting date provided in the "Postings" tab of F.19 (Provided that period is open in OB52.)
Regards,
Gaurav

TO_Number Function showing wrong values

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for