When reviewing what has happened via SysFeatureAreaLogging in would be very useful to have an additional field that stores the primary reference for the related action
e.g. for Action "Sage.MMS.SOP.ConfirmDespatchForm" the SO No field could be added
Idea Benefit | Currently the table's data only gives a clue as to what happened but without knowing the actual documents the entries refer to, the log file is more of a curiosity than a tool |
How do you solve for this problem today? | I can't - I am trying to investigate a problem in a FMCG business and the information is missing |
Hi Jo
I have a customer where the TraceableItem / TraceableBinItem allocated quantity is out of balance and the TraceableBinItem also has a phantom QuantityReserve against the record
I am trying to piece together how these errors occur and one option is to try to follow thier actions via the SysFeatureAreaLogging data
This works to an extend as I can tell which forms they opened but I feel that it would provide me with so much more information if there were also some sort of indicators giving clues as to which document number, which product or which traceable ID No were being used
In many instances it would be possible to store suitable additional information in an additional text field
I don't expect any perfect solution, or anything that links to other records - just some additional information to give me additional clues, maybe multiple values could be stored in the one field, and it would be up to the consultant to work out what those values refer to
Thanks
Andrew
thanks for the idea, can i just check that what you're looking for here is more around an audit trail of activity?
I can see that there are problems, what reference is expect on a new form when multiple orders can be added etc.
I also view the records in DateTimeOfOpen, (This is the only way to see the child forms after the parent form)
Though new order is opened first, it is the last form to be closed and logged.
There is still an unique record for each Sage.MMS.SOP.SalesOrderConfirmationForm
Note that I mean a new generic text field ... not specifically SO NO