Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- All Categories
- 73 General
- 73 Announcements
- 66.6K Microsoft Dynamics NAV
- 18.6K NAV Three Tier
- 38.4K NAV/Navision Classic Client
- 3.6K Navision Attain
- 2.4K Navision Financials
- 115 Navision DOS
- 854 Navision e-Commerce
- 1K NAV Tips & Tricks
- 772 NAV Dutch speaking only
- 615 NAV Courses, Exams & Certification
- 2K Microsoft Dynamics-Other
- 1.5K Dynamics AX
- 295 Dynamics CRM
- 109 Dynamics GP
- 10 Dynamics SL
- 1.5K Other
- 993 SQL General
- 384 SQL Performance
- 34 SQL Tips & Tricks
- 34 Design Patterns (General & Best Practices)
- Architectural Patterns
- 10 Design Patterns
- 5 Implementation Patterns
- 53 3rd Party Products, Services & Events
- 1.7K General
- 1.1K General Chat
- 1.6K Website
- 79 Testing
- 1.2K Download section
- 23 How Tos section
- 259 Feedback
- 12 NAV TechDays 2013 Sessions
- 13 NAV TechDays 2012 Sessions
Duplicate Job Ledger Entry lines on purchase !
carioka
Member Posts: 20
Hi.
When we receipts is posted through Purchase order with Job No and Task No, It is creating Lines in Job Ledger Entry and more later create the Purchase Invoice with the SAME Receipt, It is again posting in Job Ledger Entry with same values.
I think that the problem are on codeunit 90 but i dont know where.
any help?
thanks
When we receipts is posted through Purchase order with Job No and Task No, It is creating Lines in Job Ledger Entry and more later create the Purchase Invoice with the SAME Receipt, It is again posting in Job Ledger Entry with same values.
I think that the problem are on codeunit 90 but i dont know where.
any help?
thanks
0
Comments
Then in 2009SP1 which I accidently is busy with in an upgrade in jobbing environment, contains several Job related improvements. Of which one of the published statements is that purchasing against a job now works correctly. Perhaps you can backport the fix.
If you deal with discounts on purchase invoice - perhaps - you should keep you eyes open whether adjusted against job accounts were are correct. Was problem in 4.x and similar in 5.x. Micrsoft acknowledged the problem but it seem like once acknowledgeing a fault, it can take a long escallation route before beings solved.