Business Central Multi Journal Line Dimension Update

JAngle

33,155

Like ( 0 )

Report

In Business Central we have a few areas where working with dimension updates takes place for many records at a time. For instance, when assigning default dimensions there is a method to apply the same values to many records. Or when working on a document, like a purchase order, you can set the dimensions on the header and BC asks to pass them to the lines. With a journal line though it is very much an individual way of working and a user relies heavily on default dimensions values being inherited from related records. Granted edit-in-excel can be seen as the remedy here as you can make updates to the shortcut dimension columns on mass. What about when it’s not a shortcut dimension? Or the user doesn’t have access to edit-in-excel (no O365 or the add-in is blocked)?

As the gif loops through notice that all dimensions can be chosen despite whether they are on the page or not (shortcut dimensions). If the line already has previous dimension values it keeps them and the new one’s are added.

The Selection page is based on the dimension set entry table so it handles the errors for you. For example if a user tries to add the same Dimension Code twice:

For the purpose of a compare and contrast to edit-in-Excel the user does not get the captions of the dimensions and no lookup. Not attempting to have a versus battle with edit-in-Excel, just stating the idea may have some merit.

Feels like it nicely compliments the “Journal Check” functionality by letting you action this for more than one line at a time too.

And what about if you update a default dimension and don’t want to add the Account No. again to validate the data. In my example the “DEPARTMENT” has been made code mandatory for this G/L Account:

Performing a test with 5000 journal lines proved to be faster than edit-in-Excel by some distance. I clocked about 3.5 mins to update just one dimension code. Which is completely fair given it is done outside of BC and then pushed back. Doing the same with my idea takes considerably less time for that volume of lines: