Dynamics 365 CommunityForums Microsoft Dynamics GP (Archived) Financial Batch total ...

Financial Batch total does not match total of transactions

(0) Share

Report

Posted on by Community Member Microsoft Employee

We have an issue that happens every so often to financial batches. often due to someone moving transactions in/out or editing a transaction within that batch (I assume). Occasionally, the financial batch's total will not match the total of the transactions. I would think that running check links would resolve the issue, but often we do not have the luxury of kicking everyone out of the system, taking a backup, and running check links. The batch total doesn't appear to be a field that is retained after posting, and I would think it's only used to check against control totals. Can anyone confirm? we are using GP2010

*This post is locked for comments

All responses (1)

Answers (1)

Verified answer

Joshua Page on at

Like (0)

Report

RE: Financial Batch total does not match total of transactions

Hi Michael!

This can happen for many reasons and often it's small interruptions which causes it. You are correct as well, unless you are tracking batch totals through another means, GL batch totals are mainly for control purposes and is not kept in the system after posting.

Outside of checklinks there is also another method for reconciling batch totals that's a little less invasive however you still want a backup and, while it's not required, it's still recommended to have everyone out of the system.

1) Go to Tools>Utilities>Financial>Reconcile.

2) Mark the batch option.

3) Click Reconcile.

4) A report will be generated.

Common things you see will be along the lines of "Totals for batch xxxx where adjusted" (The issue you referenced), "Batch xxxx has been created" (This one usually indicate there is a stuck record in the GL work tables), and so on.

The batch reconcile process will only update the SY00500 table and in general it's safe to run as needed (again at a minimum you should capture a backup however).

Joshua