[Solved] Report ID 10408 Bank Reconciliation Questions
RSA_Tech
Member Posts: 65
Hey all,
Working with our accountant in NAV 2016. He's pointed out that the the items on Report ID 10408 are grouping in an odd way. They don't seem to be in chronological order nor are they ordered by account type they're oddly split into many groups.
The current report I'm working on has 4 groups of deposits, a single group for outstanding checks and ten groups of outstanding deposits. Each of these groups are totaling individually. In speaking with the accountant they should be totaling just once for each type. So one group with a total for Deposits, one for outstanding checks and one for outstanding deposits.
I'm familiar with user expectations being 'unique' so I wanted to reach out to the community to see how your report runs and\or get some explanation on the ordering looking at the C\AL now for what\where it controls the grouping of the report details. I'm wondering if this report is supposed to be splitting everything out or what.
The print details are looking like this:
Deposits
line item 1
line item 2
Total
Deposits
line item 3
line item 4
line item 5
Total
Outstanding Checks
line item 6
line item 7
line item 8
Total
Outstanding Checks
line item 9
line item 10
line item 11
Total
and the request is to have it display like so:
Deposits
line item 1
line item 2
line item 3
line item 4
line item 5
Total
Outstanding Checks
line item 6
line item 7
line item 8
line item 9
line item 10
line item 11
Total
Any insight would be much appreciated.

Thanks,
[Solved]
Still unsure about the precise business logic being used to sort these but I found the group method and removed it in Visual Studio Report Designer. (See screenshot)
I guess it was Bank_Rec_Header doing the unwanted grouping because the whole report was for a single account number.
For now it's what my accountant was after. Thanks for the help.
Working with our accountant in NAV 2016. He's pointed out that the the items on Report ID 10408 are grouping in an odd way. They don't seem to be in chronological order nor are they ordered by account type they're oddly split into many groups.
The current report I'm working on has 4 groups of deposits, a single group for outstanding checks and ten groups of outstanding deposits. Each of these groups are totaling individually. In speaking with the accountant they should be totaling just once for each type. So one group with a total for Deposits, one for outstanding checks and one for outstanding deposits.
I'm familiar with user expectations being 'unique' so I wanted to reach out to the community to see how your report runs and\or get some explanation on the ordering looking at the C\AL now for what\where it controls the grouping of the report details. I'm wondering if this report is supposed to be splitting everything out or what.
The print details are looking like this:
Deposits
line item 1
line item 2
Total
Deposits
line item 3
line item 4
line item 5
Total
Outstanding Checks
line item 6
line item 7
line item 8
Total
Outstanding Checks
line item 9
line item 10
line item 11
Total
and the request is to have it display like so:
Deposits
line item 1
line item 2
line item 3
line item 4
line item 5
Total
Outstanding Checks
line item 6
line item 7
line item 8
line item 9
line item 10
line item 11
Total
Any insight would be much appreciated.

Thanks,
[Solved]
Still unsure about the precise business logic being used to sort these but I found the group method and removed it in Visual Studio Report Designer. (See screenshot)
I guess it was Bank_Rec_Header doing the unwanted grouping because the whole report was for a single account number.
For now it's what my accountant was after. Thanks for the help.
0
Best Answer
-
Okay, so the reports are pretty standard. Maybe this is just a user request and the report is supposed to be running this way.
Would I control the splitting from the data side of things (c\side) or the RDLC side (VS RD\SSRB)?
This depends on how the report is build.My blog - https://www.HannesHolst.com/5
Answers
-
Now perhaps I'm looking at the wrong report.
I see report ID 10409 Bank Account -Reconcile listed as the report that supposed to run here now. Looking into that one now. Maybe I just need to change the report that the post+print button calls.
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh928279(v=nav.90).aspx0 -
Hi,
I'm using NAV2017 at the moment, so I don't have the report anymore.
But I can advise that it is a rarely situation that an application-object contains a bug, even if it looks like one :-)
Properly, the sorting is a result of a Key, Date Range or another Criteria which leads to the splitting.
Good luck :-)
My blog - https://www.HannesHolst.com/1 -
Okay, so the reports are pretty standard. Maybe this is just a user request and the report is supposed to be running this way.
Would I control the splitting from the data side of things (c\side) or the RDLC side (VS RD\SSRB)?
0 -
Okay, so the reports are pretty standard. Maybe this is just a user request and the report is supposed to be running this way.
Would I control the splitting from the data side of things (c\side) or the RDLC side (VS RD\SSRB)?
This depends on how the report is build.My blog - https://www.HannesHolst.com/5
Categories
- All Categories
- 73 General
- 73 Announcements
- 66.7K Microsoft Dynamics NAV
- 18.7K NAV Three Tier
- 38.4K NAV/Navision Classic Client
- 3.6K Navision Attain
- 2.4K Navision Financials
- 116 Navision DOS
- 851 Navision e-Commerce
- 1K NAV Tips & Tricks
- 772 NAV Dutch speaking only
- 617 NAV Courses, Exams & Certification
- 2K Microsoft Dynamics-Other
- 1.5K Dynamics AX
- 324 Dynamics CRM
- 111 Dynamics GP
- 10 Dynamics SL
- 1.5K Other
- 990 SQL General
- 383 SQL Performance
- 34 SQL Tips & Tricks
- 35 Design Patterns (General & Best Practices)
- 1 Architectural Patterns
- 10 Design Patterns
- 5 Implementation Patterns
- 53 3rd Party Products, Services & Events
- 1.6K General
- 1.1K General Chat
- 1.6K Website
- 83 Testing
- 1.2K Download section
- 23 How Tos section
- 252 Feedback
- 12 NAV TechDays 2013 Sessions
- 13 NAV TechDays 2012 Sessions
