Hi Patrick,We actually just took a deep dive into this object property a few weeks ago and changing it made a huge performance improvement in our system. What we found out is that when the property is set to ONLINE, any time an update is made to a project-connected work order, the system runs the “refresh project connections” process for the whole work order in the foreground of the application. When the property is set to BATCH, the system creates a background job to handle the refresh project connections process for that work order (Work_Order_Utility_API.Refresh_Project_Connection__). Our system was set to ONLINE, and we were noticing significant performance issues when handling project-connected work orders. Any time we’d make an update to the work order or work task like changing planned start dates on work tasks, adding new material rows, issuing material to the work task, etc., the process would take longer than expected to complete or sometimes IFS would freeze up and crash and
Hi Mathias,This solved the syntax errors I was getting. I fixed the instances of this and it allowed the macro to run without issues next time I opened a jpg. Unfortunately, Windows still asked me what program I’d like to use each time regardless of me checking the “always use this program” checkbox. I just found out form our IT group that my computer is going to be upgraded to Windows 11 in the next week or so, so I’ll test after that again to see if the operating system change makes any difference. I’ve tested with a few other users at our company and none of them are having this issue with opening jpg files though.Thanks,Evan Edwards
I also accidentally stumbled across that this issue only seems to apply to images that are loaded into IFS with the file extension of .jpg. I don’t get the window requesting to select the program to load images that are loaded in with the .jpeg extension. I’m not sure if this helps at all, just an odd thing I stumbled across troubleshooting the above macro issue.
Hi Mathias, I’ve narrowed it down to a syntax error somewhere in the UTILS macro block. I created a new macro block called HELLO that just runs a message box saying Hello!.I then changed the document macro for opening jpg to just have that macro block associated to it. When I opened a jpg file, I successfully got the message box pop up. I then added the OPENFILE macro block and was still able to successfully get the hello message box pop up. I deleted the OPENFILE macro block and added UTILS and when I try open a jpg file, I get the syntax error pop up instead of the hello message box.
I tried running these through a word comparison and it didn't really find any mismatches. Here are screenshots of the macro blocks as they are pasted in IFS:UTILSOPENFILE
Hi @Mathias Dahl ,I apologize for the large delay in my response. I had some long training and conferences I was attending recently and did not have a chance to test this out until now.I’m testing this out in one of our test environments, and I’m running into a syntax error when attempting to run the macro. I’ve set up both macro blocks under the Document Macro Blocks using the code strings from above:Then I created the new macro under the Document Macro tab following the instructions and screenshot:The macro seems to be initializing properly because when I try open jpg file, I get the Choose Macro prompt (I haven’t set up the document class process action yet just to make sure the macro was running properly). When I click Run on the Open file in Windows macro, I get this syntax error message: I’m assuming this is meaning there’s a syntax error in one of the macro blocks, but I’m not very familiar with the visual basic programming language to be able to debug what the error might be. A
Hello, Thank you all for your replies. It seems neither of these work. We are running IFS10. I tried what Robert suggested in a work task and a work order and we just don’t have the option to select from object. Is this an option that may not be switched on for us? Thanks Cory Hi Cory,I’m not sure if you’ve resolved this yet or not. I looked at the rest of the comments and didn’t see any replies indicating it was, so I thought I’d add another comment. From this screenshot, it looks like you might have right clicked in the blank white space. Can you try again by right clicking on the actual saved material row? In our environment, the spare parts menu options only show up when you right click on an actual material line. It doesn’t show when right clicking in the blank white space.Thanks,Evan Edwards
@Mathias Dahl Sure, I’d be willing to try anything, but I haven’t done any docman macros before. How would I go about doing this?Thanks,Evan Edwards
@Samuel Jokinen Below is a screenshot showing the default program by file type. I’ve tried changing and resetting these to the Photos app again, but I still get the which app do you want to use pop up each time.
@Mathias DahlI opened a jpg file and when the program pop up came up this time, I selected Paint and checked the box to always use this app and it opened the image in paint. But now when I try open the jpg attachment, I get this error. I haven’t seen this error before. Windows did keep Paint as the default app though because if I open a jpg saved locally, it opens in paint without issues.I then switched the default program back to the Photos app in Windows. I’m able to open the jpg attachment from IFS without the error message above, but it still gives me the which app do you want to use pop up each time.I don’t know if this helps or not, but I previously used a desktop tower and a Microsoft Surface laptop from when we started implementation of IFS (2021) until June of this year. I never had this issue with both the desktop tower and the Microsoft Surface. My devices got consolidated to a Dell laptop in June of this year, and that seems to be when this issue started happening. Not sure
Hi @EqeRobertK ,Thank you for the prompt response! I will submit an idea for allowing this. It would be really helpful in our business processes.
Hi @Cory , You can select this from an RMB in the Material tab of the Work Task (from IFS10). There you select the quantity and the required date and save the record, than the line is added to the material tab of the work task: If you work with a previous version of IFS, the this should be the same, but then in the Material Tab of the Work Order (I do not have an exqample of that). Hope this will help you, Robert Hi Robert, I’m not the original poster, but I have a follow up question regarding your screenshots. What version of apps 10 are you running? We are running apps 10 update 13, and we aren’t able to access the Add Spare Parts options in the RMB menu until after we manually add one row to the Materials tab. I’ve always found this odd because we’d have to add a row for something we don’t really need, access the spare parts lists, then delete the original row that was added. From your screenshots, it looks like you’re able to access the spare parts RMB menu options without h
Unfortunately, it is only parameters of datatype DATE where you can enter calculations, and only if you use the text sysdate in it. new_year_ is not a date so you will always get exactly what you type in to that method. The only way is then to schedule it to run for this year (2023) with value 2028. Then create another schedule next year with parameter value 2029. etc. Thank you for this information! Unfortunately not what I was hoping for, but at least helps me understand why I was unable to get it to work and forces me to come up with a different plan to make sure it stays updated.
@JerryB Do you have any experience with scheduling this PM plan horizon job?
Can you try something like extract(year from sysdate)+5? Here’s a screenshot of that setup:But it seems to pass the entire thing as a string. The argument that shows in the background job is NEW_YEAR_extract(year from sysdate)+5
We’re seeing this same issue in Cloud 22R1 where the work order materials show the correct cost, but there is a massively inflated planned cost on the project connection. We’re using the FIFO costing method on the inventory parts, don’t have a cost on the supplier for purchase part, and haven’t run a cost calculation that is explaining it. The planned cost showing on the project connection does equal to the sales price of the sales parts for those inventory parts, though. Do any of these parts with the inflated planned cost happen to be manufactured parts?
I wanted to follow up on this as I’m still looking for assistance on correcting this part cost issue we are experiencing.
Hi Evan, I actually think this is a bug. I hade a look at the code and it seems like it’s looking for “External” twice, instead of External and Expenses. CURSOR get_cost IS SELECT sum(cost) cost FROM equipment_structure_cost WHERE mch_code = mch_code_ AND contract = contract_ AND equipment_obj_cost_type IN (Equipment_Obj_Cost_Type_API.DB_MATERIAL, Equipment_Obj_Cost_Type_API.DB_PERSONNEL, Equipment_Obj_Cost_Type_API.DB_TOOLS_FACILITIES, Equipment_Obj_Cost_Type_API.DB_EXTERNAL, Equipment_Obj_Cost_Type_API.DB_EXTERNAL) AND to_char(cre_date, 'YYYY') = year_; CURSOR get_tot_cost IS SELECT sum(cost) cost FROM equipment_structure_cost WHERE mch_code = mch_code_ AND contract = contract_ AND equipment_obj_cost_type IN (Equipment_Obj_Cost_Type_API.DB_M
That looks very strange. If you look at the part cost screen, do you have any odd costs there? Any buckets of burden or some sort of overheads defined? Hi anmise,It looks like this is going down the right path. When I look at the part cost for this item, it shows the total cost of $149,060,400.52. We do have some overhead, but it’s being calculated off of an erroneous estimated material cost of $129 million. Any recommendations on how to try fix this incorrect cost calculation?
Hi Evan, Check if the cost that you have in project is from the supplier price Offred to this part, you can check this in client 'supplier for purchase part’, might clear your doubts. Regards, Roshan Hi Roshan,Below is a screenshot of the supplier for purchase part for this inventory part. The base price looks like it’s set to $1, so this doesn't appear to be driving the $150 million planned price.
Hi Bimsara,Thank you for the detailed response! This workaround works great and will allow us to continue until we eventually upgrade to UPD17. Thanks,Evan Edwards
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
