75
CUSTNMBR column length is very less (RM00101 - char(15)) and its not equal with SY01200 object column (char(31), could it possible to change while GP implementation? If yes, please guide me.
*This post is locked for comments
Sreeni,
If you are referring to the Master_ID in SY01200, that does not exclusively store Customer ID's. It also stores Vendor IDs and Item Numbers (the Master_Type determines what type of record is stored). Item Numbers can be up to 30 characters in GP, so Master_ID has be be large enough to hold the longest record possible.
The illustration for the your question is clearly stated in the post above. There is an essential point mentioned by Mr. Tim stating the following;
"My understanding is that the table definition(s) in Dynamics.dic which would have Customer ID at 15 can't be updated such that a change to the SQL definition will cause a miss match and a retrieve error as the field in the table buffer (still 15) wont match the database field which I believe forces an error. "
Therefore, we could conclude that the constrain is built on the application layer. That's the design, and I really never recommend any design modification.
Otherwise, we could think of work around solutions such as including fields through Extender.
Hope this helps
Thank you Mahamoud, I saw those details before post this question here.
There are some business restrictions and requirements on our GP implementation. That is the reason i am checking one more time.
Why GP has inconstancy for CUSTNMBR column length on RM00101 and SY01200 objects within the same database.
It's possible, but I don't recommend changing the customer number field as it is a primary key that is linked to various other tables, I have tried to do that on a test machine before upgrading, and the upgrade just failed out !
Although, Ms. Victoria has gone thoroughly in details regarding this issue, you could review a previous post below;
#1
Almas Mahfooz
3
User Group Leader
Share
Report
All responses (
Answers (
