Our support engineers have assembled the top recommended solutions for you.
Microsoft Dynamics AX 2012CRM Connector in Microsoft Dynamics AX 2012Financials Management in Microsoft Dynamics AX 2012Upgrading to Microsoft Dynamics AX 2012
Microsoft Dynamics AX 2009
Application Object Server (AOS)
Enterprise Portal and Role Centers
Inventory Costing in Microsoft Dynamics AX 2009
Invoice Settlements/Discounts/Reversals
SSRS and SSAS Integration
Workflow
For the life of me, I am trying to figure out why when upgrading from AX4.0 to AX2009, that I am running into problems with check contraints against the RECID column in PurchParmSubTable.
The only layer to this table is the 'sys' layer.
We're running SQL Server 2005, Windows Server 2008.
The interesting thing is the Demo Database works fine.
I've only seen one other person reporting this problem and they supposedly turned off database journaling on the table. Does that sound like a good resolution ? I figure I must be doing something wrong seeing more people haven't complained about this.
If anyone has any ideas, please let me know.
Hi All,
I am getting a similar error with salesparmsubtable.
I have two environment setup with ax 2009 sp1 India localization on windows server 2008 and sql server 2008 sp1. On my dev box there is no issue. But in my test box while confirming sales order I get an error that cannot select record in salesparmsubtable with some sales order id.
Any help is appreciated.
Kaushik.
Hi Kaushik,
check if salesparmsubtable is added to the database logging - if yes remove it
Kind regards,
harald
Hi Herald,
Thanks for the reply.
There is no database log setup done in my environment. The issue has got resolved after incorporating the code changes suggested in this blog.
Regards,
Kaushik
Hi guys / gals,
Does anyone know if there is an official MS hotfix for this problem? We are running into the same problem with SalesParmSubTable. We are getting a "record does not exist" error.
So we are saying here that turning ON / OFF database logging for this table with fix the problem? The seems like a bad solution. Which exact code fix listed here resolved the problem?
Thanks in advance.