Limited User (licence type)

(0) Share

Report

Posted on by AntonioTorre

574

1. If I use a limited user to write in Item Journal Line (T83) and then this same user posts this line, would this work? (assuming that codeunit 22 -Item Jnal. post line- will write in more than 3 extra tables).

2. If I use a limited user, do I have to specify somewhere which 3 tables he/she can write on, or this limitation is only valid in each different transaction he/she may perform?

*This post is locked for comments

I have the same question (0)

All responses (10)

Answers (1)

keoma 32,729 on at

Like (0)

Report

Check out appendix a from license guide.

mbs.microsoft.com/.../NAV2016LicensingGuide.pdf

if the used tables when Posting are on that list, everything is fine.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
Verified answer

AJAnsari 5,754 on at

Like (1)

Report
Hi Astur,

You are likely to run into an issue with this. If Automatic Cost Posting is enabled on the Inventory setup, you will definitely not be able to use a Limited User. As you will see in the document linked by Jonathan Archer (page 4 of the doc), Limited Users are never allowed to post to the General Ledger Entry table. With Automatic Cost Posting enabled, Item Journal entries will post to the General Ledger.

With Automatic Cost Posting disabled, you may be able to physically post an Item Journal entry with a Limited User, but you may still be acting outside the letter and/or spirit of what a Limited User should be able to do. Note that page 4 talks about directly or indirectly writing to the General Ledger Entry table. Notice the language used in the document:

"Writing the transactions of a Limited User to a temporary table then having a Full User (or a system process) post those transactions to table 17 is an example of indirect write access to table 17, which is not permitted."

My reading of this is that posting an Item Journal with Automatic Costing disabled, only to have a Full User run the Post Cost to G/L routine later constitutes indirect write access to Table 17 (General Ledger Entry), and is therefore not permitted for a Limited User.

No, there is no place where you specific which 3 tables a user can write to. The tables being written to are counted by the system, and tracked by session. As a result, a limited user can log in and write to 3 tables one day, and log in to write a whole different 3 tables another day. The 3 table limitation for Limited Users is for the duration of the session. Also note the exemptions to the 3 table limit on pages 4, 5, 14, and 15 in the document link provided by Jonathan Archer.

I hope this helps. If my response has answered your question, please click Yes to verify next to "Did this answer your question?"

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
keoma 32,729 on at

Like (2)

Report

Best way would be only write to item journal from external app with limited user without Posting the lines. Create a Job queue entry which is Run by a full User and posts periodically these Job journal lines.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
AntonioTorre 574 on at

Like (0)

Report

That would probably upset Microsoft.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
Suggested answer

AJAnsari 5,754 on at

Like (0)

Report

On page 4, the same paragraph I cited in my earlier response also states the following:

"Transactions created by a Limited User are not considered indirect write access if (i) they are needed by a Full User as in an input to perform their job function and (ii) transactions are processed individually (not in a batch)."

In a way, I can see how a Limited User filling out the Item Journal would fall under clause (i) above. But, I imagine it will be posted as a batch, and thus will go against clause (ii).

Unless your Limited User populates one Item Journal entry at a time(??)

If you work for a Microsoft Partner, your best bet would be to reach out to your Microsoft Partner Technical Advisor for an official clarification.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
Suggested answer

keoma 32,729 on at

Like (0)

Report

As aj ansari correctly describes it's always a mess with limited users. The formal restrictions are quite hard and you need in the end a license attorney if you want to use it correctly/legally. But ... in all cases where one wants to use LU the Situation is not clear and needs clarification with microsoft. I assume MS has defined that deliberately complicated in that way. So MS can handle that the hard way, so in the end LU is not usable at all ... or handles that not so hard and you can use LU although you use it maybe not 100% correct.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
Roberto Stefanetti 12,998 on at

Like (0)

Report

i agree with Jonathan, "Job queue posting" is a good solution also suggested by Microsoft.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
Suggested answer

Alexander Ermakov 28,096 on at

Like (0)

Report

That would not much upset Microsoft as in good old days the option was to access the SQL database directly or via some web-based interface bypassing the application as such :-), which was indeed upset for Microsoft. Now they at least have some limited license sales.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
AJAnsari 5,754 on at

Like (0)

Report

I know you mean well Alexander, but as a Microsoft Partner, it is very important to make sure that we're careful about how we answer a license question and do not inadvertently encourage misuse of a license.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
Suggested answer

Alexander Ermakov 28,096 on at

Like (1)

Report

Indeed! This is what I'm exactly telling.

In the case when customer is coming to you and telling "I have 300 operators of call center who perform only one action of filling in only one document", under earlier license model this might mean he needs to buy 300 user licenses, which is of course stupid as he would not use 99 percent of functionality he had paid for.

Exactly for this type of cases Microsoft had introduced limited license user into licensing model, in order to give customers opportunity to be loyal :-).

Was this reply helpful? Yes No