Skip to main content
Solved

GI condition based on checkbox being marked

  • 10 May 2024
  • 9 replies
  • 89 views

Trying to make a GI that has a Condition to only show results is a specific Warehouse Item detail exists, and if that Warehouse Item detail has the Override Replenishment check box checked.  This is what I have currently:

But my results do not filter out just the check boxed items.  And I triggering the validation of a check box incorrectly?

9 replies

Badge +12

If you attach an XML of the GI, I will look at it, but it looks fine to me.

Userlevel 4
Badge

Hey Daryl, 

Here is the XML verison.  I think I have that solved, but a different issue.  I am getting duplicate records as a results.

 

Badge +12

Try this.

Userlevel 4
Badge

Thanks.  But I am not seeing a change, and it still is resulting in multiple lines of the same record.  I think the issue might be stemming from multiple vendor records per part.  How would I ignore that in the current context?

Badge +12

Without having the same data that you have, it’s difficult to replicate your environment. Demo data didn’t give me multiple records, but your guess would make sense.

You could try grouping by InventoryID.

If that doesn’t work, I would eliminate tables and attempt to understand what’s causing the doubling up.

Userlevel 4
Badge

I tried grouping, but then my results are wrong.  Because of the grouping, the safety stock and qty on hand was adding up together, which is not the goal.

 

I’ll play around with which tables might be causing the issue.

Userlevel 4
Badge

Ok, it was because I added a table to pull in Vendor Lead Times (POVendorInventory).  Need to play around with that.  

Userlevel 5
Badge +1

Hi @claudematherne24 , one tip if you are grouping to get around a duplicate, the AVG field aggregate may give you the right answer.  It’s a bit of a band-aid solution since it it’s only hiding the underlying issue, but sometimes there’s no getting around it.

Userlevel 4
Badge

That’s a pretty good band aid.  I’ll give that a shot.

Reply