|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Premise: If a customer has more computer systems located in different cities, we create an account for each plant (same account code) .. There are people who have also plants hundreds informatici.Per every computer system are creating a contract: the account code is the same. For example. BA013 (account code) -SW03 (service code).
Since the code BA013-SW03 always the same for hundreds of plants I have to use the next box, and here lies the problem because there is a sequential number. Regard |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm not sure if what you described is the best practice, but in any case, you should not use the Contract Sub-Code for this, you can include the additional identifying information in the original/main Contract Code, possibly separated with a dash.
Hope this helps. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Contract code is a free text, the system verifies that the code is unique however, the formatting is personally and the system cannot tell that you dived the Contract code field into 3 parts and and you wish to increment the last part.
One additional tip - do not end it with .1 but rather .001 this is because if you'll want to sort by the code and get the list sorted by this number, and as the Code is a textual field, leading zeros will help. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
We have found the lack of incrementing the second part of the code (the number after the decimal) to be annoying as well. That said, it's not that difficult for us to look up the last number and manually update (but it would be nice if it automatically inserted the next highest number but remain editable!).
Catello -- you are doing this exactly right (it's very similar to how we do it). As commit says, keep the pre-pending zero's in the list (e.g. 0001, 0002) so that things properly sort. The good news on this is that we can now fully edit the code field if this needs to be fixed. cheers! //ray |
