Microsoft Dynamics AX (Archived)

Error 'Query extended range failure: Syntax error near 0'

(0) Share

Report

Posted on by krishna.rao@dax

3,006

When you are navigation on the form 'Release products', getting above error

message (probably for the items which have parenthesis as prefix.).

User is being annoyed by this message while navigating on the form.

As a test case I've created an Item with parenthesis as prefix & got same

error while pointing the cursor to the field 'Item number' in the form.

Could you please help how to overcome this?

*This post is locked for comments

I have the same question (0)

All responses (17)

Answers (3)

Verified answer

Martin Dráb 237,965 Most Valuable Professional on at

Like (0)

Report

Yes, parentheses is the root cause; AX tries to interpret the name as the extended query syntax, which isn't what you want.

But another question is where AX tries to add such a range when you're merely "pointing the cursor to the item". I don't know the answer without looking into AX, therefore could you give us the call stack leading to the error? (E.g. you can add a breakpoint to Info.add()).

By the way, it's really an unfortunate naming convention for items. I strongly suggest you stop using it, because otherwise you're going to have other related problems (e.g. when users will search items by name).

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
krishna.rao@dax 3,006 on at

Like (0)

Report

Hi Martin,

Before posting this thread, I've placed a break point & seems the job is done by kernel.

So is there any work around to overcome this issue? (apart from not giving the

name parentheses prefixed & we've similar items with transactions)

Thank you so much Martin.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
Martin Dráb 237,965 Most Valuable Professional on at

Like (0)

Report

I would have to reproduce it in AX and analyze it, which unfortunately I can't do in the moment. Maybe if you give us a more detailed description of when it happens, we'll be able to build a hypothesis.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
krishna.rao@dax 3,006 on at

Like (0)

Report

Hi Martin,

Thank you so much & please do at your feasible time.

Description: This error is not related to customization.I believe It's default behaviour in AX.

We will experience when the active record has Name with prefix as parentheses & mouse

pointer is on the field 'ItemNumber'(or one click once on the field 'ItemNumber') ..

You can reproduce the same & Kindly let me know if you need anything regarding this.

Thank you so much..

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
krishna.rao@dax 3,006 on at

Like (0)

Report

Hello experts,

Anyone please comment on this..

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
Verified answer

Vilmos Kintera 46,149 on at

Like (1)

Report

It is not recommended to use special characters in unique identifiers, since it will break stuff in AX. Please avoid using parenthesis, asterisk, apostrophes, quotation marks etc.

The message is coming because of an advanced filter either on the form, or in the factboxes on the right. You could try to disable the factboxes for the user and see if they still get the error, or check what the advanced filters are on the form (Ctrl + F3). The query range might be hidden, in which case you will not see it through the GUI.

Alternatively if you do not have too many transactions, you could try to rename the primary key on your item and remove the parentheses. On Item number right click > Record info > Rename, however please be very careful with this. If there are customizations where it is not using the ItemId extended data type correctly or there are no relations and you have just copied the value, the update will not work on those as expected! Please try it in a test environment first and validate all business processes involving Items, before carrying it out in a production environment.

The other option is to suspend using those items, and create new ones with proper ItemId, then hide it on your listpage by writing some code to filter the records.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
krishna.rao@dax 3,006 on at

Like (0)

Report

HI Vilmos ,

I'd appreciate you taking time to reply..

disabled fact boxes not worked.Haven't tried Advance filter.

However from the customer point of view it's not acceptable.

Hope Microsoft should consider this.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
Vilmos Kintera 46,149 on at

Like (0)

Report

One of the first things I have learned when started using AX was to never use any special symbols in unique identifier fields, since that can mess around with your system. Check these: technet.microsoft.com/.../aa569937.aspx

I am afraid if your users do not know this it is down to lack of proper training, which is usually the implementation partners' fault. My recommendation above still stands, I do not think you would get any other suggestions to resolve this matter.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
krishna.rao@dax 3,006 on at

Like (0)

Report

Do you think it's ridiculous to use prefix as '(' . There may be a lot of cases.

Customer may using their own software rather than AX & now they want to migrate to AX. In this case some customers they wish to continue the same names which they had & reluctant to change.Could you force them to change? some won't agree.

Ultimately the end user is the main resource for a software, you need to think in his direction as far as it's logical.

Was this reply helpful? Yes No
Verified answer

Vilmos Kintera 46,149 on at

Like (0)

Report

All customers will start pushing what they want. You need to tell them it is a technical limitation of the software which they cannot aruge with, and during data migrations provide a mapping for the values (old itemid <> new itemid). I have seen many customers who were using other systems, like SAP with different naming conventions and could always convince them to use data mapping. Legacy item names could be imported to a search field, or custom field, with the exception to convert special characters to dash "-" or whitespace " ", so they could still search for their old values if they want, but AX unique identifiers are not compromised.

If you are not taking this approach, you are clearly doing it wrong.

Kind regards

Was this reply helpful? Yes No