| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Barney Stone
Administrator
USA
5517 Posts |
 Posted - 07/08/2009 : 08:21:24 AM
|
Sean -
That feature has been in the program since version 5.8. See the system parameter LogMultiRecordEditorChanges. |
Barney Stone, President
Stone Edge Technologies, Inc.
610-994-3699 ext. 111 |
 |
|
|
chris@fbl.bz
Starting Member
USA
4 Posts |
Posted - 10/26/2009 : 1:29:11 PM
|
Hello,
I agree that this is a huge problem and should be a big priority along with multi box shipments.
If there is an order error, sometimes inventory will go out of sync. There is no record of this. If you run all the separate reports, you will still never figure it out.
In MOM, there was a simple report that showed all inventory transactions whether it was a manual adjustment, a sale, receipt of a PO or a return. It would label which type of transaction each was. It would show the adjustment amount, and then the new balance. So if something got screwed up, you would be able to see that the balance was incorrect somewhere and figure out where the mistake was.
I don't remember there being any inventory disappearing with MOM, but if it did, you would be able to figure out where it went wrong since the inventory balance would help you track where it went wrong.
This is needed for any company that tracks a lot of inventory. Things are bound to go wrong and there is no other way to figure this out without spending hours and days on it. |
|
|
|
mckane
Member
193 Posts |
Posted - 10/30/2009 : 5:27:13 PM
|
chris ,
This is still definitely a problem plaguing Stoneedge. We do an inventory count every quarter and get all of them in-synch and then we run SEOM for 3 months and 10-15% of items are out of whack. No run-time errors or known issues for us. The build we have is stable, however, something within SE is misfiring and not adding or deducting values correctly.
We have to do a complete inventory count every quarter because of this issue - things just get so out of whack.
For a while we thought we were just crazy... but we pick and pack by barcode and our error rates on packages are below .2%. We do everything by barcode, and as we've gotten more efficient and effective and precise in our handling of inventory, the out-of-whack-ness of QOH has continued to be a problem. We have video cameras in the warehouse to prevent shrinkage. We're really quite certain SE is misfiring.
Our warehouse manager will sporadically find issues and come to me. She'll say "I swear to you that I removed 3 of these from inventory yesterday and they are right back in stock". That's happened quite a few times. She will SWEAR to me that she did it and that the next day, it's off again. So I had her start logging on a piece of paper whenever she made manual changes to items. Sure enough, every once in a while she would have a note on her paper of a change she made, and yet the inventory values in the QOH would not reflect the change. Attmepts to recreate are not successful, but she has the note, and a record of attempting to make the change.
The first critical step would be for SE to have a record of EVERY transaction with the QOH in the Inventory Table. That's critical. We need to be able to see the user and the application that made the change, and the order or PO that is corresponds to. Otherwise, this issue is a needle in a haystack. Everything needs to be logged. There's so much going on, with downloads and revisions to orders, and over 20,000 SKUs that it is nearly impossible to debug this and find where SE is misfiring. I've long suspected it's on the order import process and when you manually modify the QOH of an item.... then again, there could be problems elsewhere.
barney and kevin - is this still slated to address in early 2010?? We are anxious for a cure, for sure. At the very least, it would be nice to get a log of every change and some tranparency into that, with a time stamp, and the order that the change corresponds to, the application that made the change, and the employee that made the change. |
Edited by - mckane on 10/30/2009 5:28:14 PM |
|
|
|
mckane
Member
193 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2009 : 2:51:05 PM
|
Hmmm... any update on this?
We did an inventory count of the entire warehouse late last week. Over 15% of items were off and nearly all of them were off in the same way: Stoneedge said we had more in stock that were really actually on the shelf. Thousands of items. Most were just off by 2 or 3.
Today we got a
""ODBC - update on a linked table 'Inventory' failed."
Several times during a download.
I believe that there is a problem with the download/import processing of orders where it does not reduce inventory from the inventory table when it should. I believe it is sporadic.
Are there any plans to address this? Or to log all changes to the inventory table for later audit?
We'd really really really love to get to the bottom of this once and for all.
|
|
|
|
Barney Stone
Administrator
USA
5517 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2009 : 5:35:54 PM
|
Yes, McKane, we are working on major improvements to the whole order import process. They are nearing completion now, and should be in Beta testing by year end.
And yes, we will be adding more change tracking to the inventory system, although most of our users are not having anywhere near the problems you have. |
Barney Stone, President
Stone Edge Technologies, Inc.
610-994-3699 ext. 111 |
|
|
|
mckane
Member
193 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2009 : 5:47:08 PM
|
That's great news.
The order importer will be a big step.
The inventory revamp as well (especially with some tracking/auditing).
Thanks for the info. I'll keep eyes open for the new order importer.
|
|
|
|
mckane
Member
193 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2009 : 02:25:41 AM
|
Out of curiosity - the rest of you who are experiencing issues, what versions are you running...
US: SE 5.607
SQL Server 2000
Windows Small Business Server 2003
Based on Barney's recommendation, we'll be upgrading to SQL Server 2008 and to a more recent version of the SE Order Manager as well. |
|
|
|
chrisjohnson
Member
USA
132 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2009 : 08:08:31 AM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by mckane[/i]
[br]Out of curiosity - the rest of you who are experiencing issues, what versions are you running...
US: SE 5.607
SQL Server 2000
Windows Small Business Server 2003
Based on Barney's recommendation, we'll be upgrading to SQL Server 2008 and to a more recent version of the SE Order Manager as well.
We use:
Enterprise 5.612 (however we will be upgrading to the 5.9 series soon - probably the next version)
Access 2003
Our SEOM program runs on Server 2003 Terminal server and two WinXP desktops
SQL Express 2005 on Server 2003
We also have had unexplained inventory issues. For example, we had an issue recently where we had received 36 items into inventory (prior to this we had 0), had orders for 36 items in a 3 week period, however SEOM had our count at 3. A physical count proved we had 0. There have been a number of these unexplainable inventory counts being out of sync on multiple products. |
|
|
|
Barney Stone
Administrator
USA
5517 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2009 : 10:01:38 AM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by mckane[/i]
[br]Out of curiosity - the rest of you who are experiencing issues, what versions are you running...
US: SE 5.607
SQL Server 2000
Windows Small Business Server 2003
Based on Barney's recommendation, we'll be upgrading to SQL Server 2008 and to a more recent version of the SE Order Manager as well.
We do not recommend using SQL Server 2000. Our Enterprise users have found that SQL Server 2005 and 2008 work much better. We are also not crazy about Small Business Server. Depending on which features you use (Exchange, SQL Server, etc.), it can overload the computer it is running on. It's OK for smaller companies, but higher volume users should run SQL Server on its own dedicated server. |
Barney Stone, President
Stone Edge Technologies, Inc.
610-994-3699 ext. 111 |
|
|
|
chris@fbl.bz
Starting Member
USA
4 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2009 : 1:20:32 PM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by mckane[/i]
[br]Out of curiosity - the rest of you who are experiencing issues, what versions are you running...
US: SE 5.607
SQL Server 2000
Windows Small Business Server 2003
Based on Barney's recommendation, we'll be upgrading to SQL Server 2008 and to a more recent version of the SE Order Manager as well.
I am using SQL Server 2005 on its own machine and running OM 5.612 |
|
|
|
mckane
Member
193 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2009 : 1:53:55 PM
|
| We are using windows small business server, but we don't use it for anything but Stoneedge SQL. No exchange, not a DNS server, etc. So for all intents and purposes, it's running as a standalone. |
|
|
|
Erik-RMC
New Member
12 Posts |
Posted - 11/17/2009 : 12:46:55 PM
|
We are having basically the same issues as Mckane still. We do constant inventory and have to adjust items all the time. It seems to always say we have more than we actually do. I think it could be tied to the PO receiving part of things. We had one large PO from one manufacturer where it double received about half the PO. I had to go in myself and fix all the inventory on those SKU's. It then would revert back to the wrong count a few days later mysteriously so I would change it again. Other than the inventory issues which are a pretty major problem we are fairly happy with Stone Edge overall. We switched from MOM about a year ago and never had these inventory issues with them. If we did get off a little I could go back and see the log of changes and see where the problem was which was usually user error. I don't think this is user error but with no log of changes to inventory there is no way to tell as others have already stated.
If there are plans to fix this please let me know. We are in the Beta program but haven't updated since February because quite frankly we are happy with the version we are using for the most part. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Inventory count
