I was trying to open "size of company accounts" report in D365forOps. I got the below error.
I have used https://[Your Dynamics AX URL]/?cmp=USMF&mi=Output:SysCompanySize url.
Initially i thought error is due to SysCompanySize output menu item is in Application Foundation which is referring to SysCompanySize report which is in Application Suite.
So i've created a menu item in Application Suite for the report. Then i tried to open the new menu item, got the same error.
Hi,
can i use OR with Not Like in a query range?
OR with like works...
(AccountNum LIKE "005*") || (Name LIKE "SGBD*")
...but how change to Not Like
Regards
Michael
Hi,
Here is a great example: community.dynamics.com/.../ax-2012-customize-dixf-for-cross-company-import
Yes already done. And Installation file setup is working without any issues in Production side. I'm working with same file setup in test environment but arise above issue.
Is the Production also a 64 bit system?
Unfortunately, I can't see beyond these points!
Yes Production also 64 bit system :-)
Hi,
when you go for Batch class or direct PO Creation here only initial values are assigned.
Class-->PurchTableType
Method --> initValue()
purchTable.WorkerPurchPlacer = DirPersonUser::findUserWorkerReference();
change the code here and try it with info message.
Put a debugger and check where the values actually get changing for the field.
Thanks.
Hi,
when you go for Batch class or direct PO Creation here only initial values are assigned.
Class-->PurchTableType
Method --> initValue()
purchTable.WorkerPurchPlacer = DirPersonUser::findUserWorkerReference();
change the code here and try it with info message.
Put a debugger and check where the values actually get changing for the field.
Thanks.
one way to optimize is to join PurchReqLine and purchTable all in the outer query.
while select RecId from purchReqTable where purchReqTable.ApprovalGroupId == 'HSE'
join RecId from purchReqLine where purchReqLine.PurchReqId == purchReqTable.PurchReqId
join PurchId from purchTable where purchTable.PurchId == purchReqLine.PurchId
{
i++;
info(int2str(i) + ') ' + purchTable.PurchId);
}
info('Total ' + int2str(i));
And select limited fields.
That is without converting to query, which should already be faster than your current code.
I need to convert the following X++ select statement (working code) into Query to permanently filter PO form (already attempted, looking for other ways to implement/optimize/best practice):
while select purchReqTable where purchReqTable.ApprovalGroupId == 'HSE'
{
select purchReqLine where purchReqLine.PurchReqId == purchReqTable.PurchReqId;
if(purchReqLine.RecId>0)
{
while select purchTable where purchTable.PurchId == purchReqLine.PurchId
{
i++;
info(int2str(i) + ') ' + purchTable.PurchId);
}
}
}
info('Total ' + int2str(i));
Hi Michael,
You can write a code like below,
For X++:
Eg. select firstOnly custTable
where !(custTable.AccountNum LIKE "*005*");
For Query:
queryBuildRange.value(!*005*);
Thanks.
Assuming that you want to filter the PurchTable datasource, you need something like this:
QueryBuildDataSource purchTableDs = purchTable_ds.queryBuildDataSource();
QueryBuildDataSource reqLineDs = purchTableDs.addDataSource(tableNum(PurchReqLine));
QueryBuildDataSource reqTableDs = reqLineDsě.addDataSource(tableNum(PurchReqTable));
reqLineDs.relations(true);
reqLineDs.joinMode(JoinMode::ExistsJoin);
reqTableDs.relations(true);
reqTableDs.addRange(fieldNum(PurchReqTable, ApprovalGroupId)).value(queryValue('HSE'));Hi,
You have the table relation of
1. PurchReqLine.PurchReqTable = PurchReqTable.RecId
2. PurchLine.PurchReqLineRefId = PurchReqLine.LineRefId
Create the join query and loop it.
You can get the PurchId from PurchLine Table otherwise you can link PurchTable with PurchLine Table and get the data.
Hope this relation will help you to write query.
Thanks
I want to update/improve my earlier comment. There is no need for purchtable at all.
while select RecId from purchReqTable where purchReqTable.ApprovalGroupId == 'HSE'
join RecId from purchReqLine where purchReqLine.PurchReqId == purchReqTable.PurchReqId
{
i++;
info(int2str(i) + ') ' + purchReqLine.PurchId);
}
info('Total ' + int2str(i));
Hi all,
I was working with BOM journals and found out that the reservation for my BOM lines is automatically performed.
I have setup the reservation field on my inventory journal name to be "Manual" however it seems not to be working.
Is it possible to have manual reservation on BOM journals? Am I missing some setup? Is that standard behaviour by design?
Hope you can help me.
Hi,
Just replace the line conItemID = [invTable.ItemId];
to
conItemID += [invTable.ItemId];
You will get them as comma separated values by default
This is a framework form which is of course available to all users. This is dynamically designed for each operation. At best, you can hide certain operations, and the place to look for is, the Controller and Service class of a particular operation. Not this form!!
Hi everyone,
I am currently working on refining user roles and require to restrict access to certain modules. As AX is role-based, I am currently finding the entrypoint associated with modules and removing privileges as necessary. However I have found that when I come across the form: SysOperationTemplateForm, and check to see which roles are associated with it.. The roles don't correspond with the roles that have been assigned to the user in question.
This suggests that there might be another way that user is gaining access to this form.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Henna
Hi there ,
i want to create a list which has fields
ItemID, ItemName, postedQty, DeductedQty, Recieved Qty and these fields should be sorted by date.
Can you please guide me how to create a list page form which retrieves the information of all the itemIds containing the above information.
thanks
Regards.
Hi ,
Thanks For Your Help Crispin.
Thank you so much.
I have done that. Whether it is correct or wrong
Please find the below screen shot
Because it is actually populating Requester .So i have assigned that.
For now it is solved.
Thanks for Your support.
Have a great day.