Can anyone explain why these provide different values?
the result:
Solved
Different Values of the Same Field?
Best answer by Neil Cantral
I recommend joining an aliased table so you can easily reference anything from the parent account without unexpected behaviors.
Here is a quick example stolen from a Business Accounts inquiry:
+3The first column is displaying the AcctCD value of the parent account while the second column is showing the actual BAccountID value.
The parent BAccountID is the value on the Customer record and does not require a second join to grab the parent AcctCD. I assume this is done for performance reasons to increase the efficiency of formulas and queries. However, when writing a GI it is changed to display the AcctCD for the sake of convenience and usability since it doesn’t require the user to manually add another table/join if they’re just looking for a reference to the parent account.
1 person likes this
+3It is because one value is the Values that you “see” displayed & the other is the SQL value of the record in the Table.
You can see this clearly using Doc Type form the ARInvoice table.
1 person likes this
+3
As an example when totaling/ displaying the AR Invoices & Credit memos, we negate the Credit Memos by using
=IIf( [ARInvoice.DocType]='CRM', -([ARInvoice.CuryOrigDocAmt]), [ARInvoice.CuryOrigDocAmt] )
Instead of
=IIf( [ARInvoice.DocType]='Credit Memo’, -([ARInvoice.CuryOrigDocAmt]), [ARInvoice.CuryOrigDocAmt] )
1 person likes this
+3I recommend joining an aliased table so you can easily reference anything from the parent account without unexpected behaviors.
Here is a quick example stolen from a Business Accounts inquiry:
1 person likes this
Reply
Most helpful members this week
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.