Hello folks:

My accountant is reporting a problem posting day end Order Entry batches. She reports when she posts multiple batches and generates errors, they will generate multiple error batches. That makes sense.

However, the problem is that if there are multiple error batches, they subsequent ones will be duplicates of the initial one, and any error information in the subsequent error logs is overwritten by the primary one.

So if she runs Day End Batch 1, Batch 2, and Batch 3, and gets errors on Batches 1 and 2, those become Batch 4 (Errors: Posting Sequence 1) and Batch 5 (Errors: Posting Sequence 2). However, Batch 5, instead of having the errors from posting sequence 2, will just be an exact duplicate of Batch 4 -- same items, same amounts. The unique data from Batch 5 is gone.

Is there a way to fix this so this does not happen?

We are running OE 8.1C, AR 9.0A, and (if it matters) Ledger 9.0B. Data integrity checks run today, after this event, came up no errors on all three modules.

Thanks!
Brus Wasson
Seattle Sports Company

Hi Brus,

Leaving aside why there are any errors in the batch at all, do you create the batches directly in dayend or is the OE Dayend data retrieved into Receivables?

Is there any possibility that your accountant made a backup prior to posting these batches with errors so that we could try and duplicate the problem with this data? Does the accountant post one batch at a time, or multiple batches at once?

Hi Andrew:

Per a conversation with my accounting person:

Leaving aside why there are any errors in the batch at all

For credit card sales we use the order number for check number. If there are split ships, the order number is used each time. However, as check number must be unique, subsequent orders, ships, and cc payments generate errors as the order number is used a second time. The accountant changes it to order number-2 (or 3, or 4, or whatever) and reruns.

do you create the batches directly in dayend or is the OE Dayend data retrieved into Receivables?

Data is retrieved into Receivables.

Is there any possibility that your accountant made a backup...?

Not in this case, but she has encountered the problem before and will be aware to make a back up next time the situation might occur for sharing.

Does the accountant post one batch at a time, or multiple batches at once?

Multiple.

Additional information:

Today, before we talked, my accountant fixed an reposted the first series of errors without incident. She then went in and manually changed the second error batch with the correct errors but they did not post accurately, they posted with the values of the first batch of errors. Subsequently, she simply deleted the second error batch and re-entered the entire thing manually from scratch. That worked.

I have advised her to post batches one at a time from now on as the error only occurs when multiple batches are posted. That should solve the problem for us, but if any of the above results in any insight, I would appreciate it and I will definitely make a backup available to see if the problem can be replicated, should she start doing multiple posts again.

Thanks,
Brus

Hi Brus,

Hard as this may be to believe, we have not had any previous reports of anything similar to this. I'll be interested to see what process she's using.

If you used the "authorization number" from the credit card terminal as the "check number" it would be unique and would avoid the "duplicate payment" problem.

Is there a reason that you are not using the "direct" method of sending the batches to Receivables? This would send the payment method across as well (if you're using AR 9.0A).

She then went in and manually changed the second error batch with the correct errors but they did not post accurately, they posted with the values of the first batch of errors.

This doesn't make any sense. We've never had a batch "not post accurately". Does she mean it didn't post the way she expected? What was she expecting and what actually occured? If she could religously make a backup prior to posting, then she would be able to send us the data if something didn't post "accurately" and we would be able to see what she was seeing.

I'm sure we'll track this down. If she's using an unexpected procedure, we should protect against it.

Is it possible she's copying files back and forth between systems?