Using the Manufacturing package (JAMS), I'm trying to write custom code to trigger a process after a Move transaction is Released. I should be able to do a PXOverride of the MoveEntry class' Release method, but at runtime Acumatica complains that I can't because Release is not a member of MoveEntry. It appears to be a problem because MoveEntry is derived from MoveEntryBase which is written in a way which can't be overridden.
I also tried to override the INReceiptEntry class' Release method, since releasing a Move transaction creates INReceipt records and releases them. So I thought I could trigger my process there after each INReceiptEntry Release call. However, when I override this, it isn't getting called when a Move transaction is Released. I thought about also possibly overriding the Persist of INReceiptEntry and check for Released=true. However, every time Persist is called, Released=false. Possibly the cache isn't updated, I don't know.
Is there any way I can trigger a process immediately after a Move Transaction is finished Releasing?
ERP v17.210.0034
JAMS v17.210.0034.42 - 2018.06.06
You should be able to override AMReleaseProcess ReleaseDocProc(AMBatch doc)
Just check the doc for the correct AMDocType as this process is for all MFG transactions.
If you want to override on the IN side it would be similar to override INDocumentRelease ReleaseDocProcR(JournalEntry je, INRegister doc) and check the doc type
Trying to look at the buttons on MoveEntry will not always run as a user can use the release process screen (same setup found in Inventory). The button on the IN entry screens are not used for releasing IN transactions (uses INDocumentRelease)
Related
I'm looking for a way (using SuiteScript 2.0) to handle real-time persistent (stored) field updates, where a field might have changed in NetSuite (for example a lead time was just updated), and it doesn't matter if a user saved the change, or some other automated process changed that field. I just want to be able to pick up on that change:
The moment that it's done, and
Without regard for who or what kicked it off (e.g. it could be a person, but it could also be an automated change from a workflow, or a formula on the field itself which pulls values from another field)
Doing some research I found some options that looked somewhat promising at first. One being the afterSubmit event in a client script, and the other being the fieldChanged event. My issue however is, from what I understood those only really seem to be triggered by a user manually going in and making those changes, but this is only one part of the puzzle and doesn't seem to cover changes made outside of the scope of the user making those changes. Is that correct however? Or would one of those events still be able to capture changes done to that field regardless of who (or what) initiated or triggered the change, and right at the moment the change was saved/ persisted to the database?
UserEvents are basically triggers. In their deployment records you can set the context in which they fire so you can get them to fire in all circumstances (called contexts in Netsuite) but one.
That circumstance is User Events are not fired for record saves made in User Event scripts. i.e., if an AfterSubmit UserEvent script loads, changes and saves your record a fresh user event will not be fired.
I've got a really simple azure Function with a CosmosDbTrigger set up (taken nearly straight from the examples just as a minimal repro):
[FunctionName("ProcessEmail")]
public static void Run([CosmosDBTrigger("mydb", "mycollection")]IReadOnlyList<Document> documents, TraceWriter log)
{
log.Verbose("Documents modified " + documents.Count);
log.Verbose("First document Id " + documents[0].Id);
}
This was super simple to set up and works perfectly.
However, in my case I am only interested in being notified when a record is inserted - not when it is updated.
Is it possible to have the trigger only occur when a document is inserted?
If not, is it possible to tell, per-document, whether it was an insertion or an update that triggered this run?
If not, what's my best option here? Have a flag on the document for whether or not this phase of it has been processed?
We had a similar requirement for an update-only CosmosDB trigger in one of our function apps. However, we ended up using a flag since controlling the change feed is not yet supported according to the docs.
Today, you see all operations in the change feed. The functionality
where you can control change feed, for specific operations such as
updates only and not inserts is not yet available. You can add a “soft
marker” on the item for updates and filter based on that when
processing items in the change feed.
I need to delete some records related to the current record when it is deactivated. I can get the the event when the record is deactivated but I have looked around for some time on Google and this site for the code to delete records in javascript but I can't find any, though I know there must be some out there.
Can anyone help?
Thanks
I would be alright with doing this with a plugin, all I would need to know is how to pick up that the record has been deactivated
You can register a plugin on the SetState and SetStateDynamic messages (recommend the Pre event in your scenario). Each of these messages will pass an EntityMoniker in the InputParameters property bag which refers to the record that is being deactivated.
In your code you will need to:
Check that the new state in the SetState request is deactivated (since of course a record can usually be reactivated and you don't want to try deleting things then too, presumably)
Pick up the EntityMoniker from IPluginExecutionContext.InputParameters
Run your query to identify and delete related records
Exit the plugin to allow the SetState transaction to complete
If you really want to delete a record with JavaScript there is a sample on the MSDN.
Its a little long winded (its a CRUD example - create, retrieve, update & delete). But it should contain the information you need.
Note there is also an example on that page which doesnt use jQuery (if using jQuery is a problem).
That said I think for this operation would will find it easier to implement, test and maintain with a plugin (so I would go for Greg's answer).
Additionally a plugin will apply in all contexts, e.g. if you deactivate the record in a workflow your JavaScript will not run, but a plugin will.
I can't seem to get a clear answer for this: when you change a transient property, and then call save, should the NSManagedObjectContextDidSaveNotification be triggered? In my notification listener, how can I filter out these notifications that are coming from changes in transient properties?
Here's what I'm trying to do: I want to load up a list of contacts in the main thread, and when it's done, I want to read the images in a background thread from the address book and attach them to the contacts. This works fine on the face of it: after loading from the Contacts entity, I use a dispatch queue to loop through all the contacts, find their image in the Address Book, and save them in Contact's "contactImage" property (which is transient). The dispatch queue then successfully reloads the tableview (on the main thread) and the images show up next to the contacts.
The problem is that if I do anything to the contact that invokes a "save" on even ONE of the managed objects (for e.g. I delete one of the contacts), the NSManagedObjectContextDidSaveNotification is invoked for ALL the contacts. I've found that this is because the contactImage property was changed before ... commenting that the "self.contactImage = img;" line makes the issue go away. This is surprising to me, since I would have thought that the save notification would only be called for non-transient properties.
Can anyone confirm if this is expected behavior? Or am I doing something wrong? If it's expected, how do you filter out the updates to transient properties in the NSManagedObjectContextDidSaveNotification listener? I need to do some post-processing in the listener, and I don' want to do it needlessly for transient property updates. I've checked the changedValues dictionary on the NSManagedObject, but it seems to show empty inside the listener (since only transient properties changed, I'm guessing).
Thanks.
Yesterday,
Transient properties have one key characteristic -- they are managed. You can easily add ivars that are not managed to any NSManagedObject. If you do so, they are not subject to -save: notifications.
A related question: Why are you using a transient ivar? They have some specialized uses; primarily, they are used to trigger property updates throughout the model; i.e. the behavior you are seeing.
A second related question: why are you background fetching all of the images instead of lazy loading them from the Address Book? This looks like a case of premature optimization to me.
Andrew
I'm wondering what strategies people are using to handle the creation and editing of an entity in a master-detail setup. (Our app is an internet-enabled desktop app.)
Here's how we currently handle this: a form is created in a popup for the entity that needs to be edited, which we give a copy of the object. When the user clicks the "Cancel" button, we close the window and ignore the object completely. When the user clicks the "OK" button, the master view is notified and receives the edited entity. It then copies the properties of the modified entity into the original entity using originalEntity.copyFrom(modifiedEntity). In case we want to create a new entity, we pass an empty entity to the popup which the user can then edit as if it was an existing entity. The master view needs to decide whether to "insert" or "update" the entities it receives into the collection it manages.
I have some questions and observations on the above workflow:
who should handle the creation of the copy of the entity? (master or detail)
we use copyFrom() to prevent having to replace entities in a collection which could cause references to break. Is there a better way to do this? (implementing copyFrom() can be tricky)
new entities receive an id of -1 (which the server tier/hibernate uses to differentiate between an insert or an update). This could potentially cause problems when looking up (cached) entities by id before they are saved. Should we use a temporary unique id for each new entity instead?
Can anyone share tips & tricks or experiences? Thanks!
Edit: I know there is no absolute wrong or right answer to this question, so I'm just looking for people to share thoughts and pros/cons on the way they handle master/details situations.
There are a number of ways you could alter this approach. Keep in mind that no solution can really be "wrong" per se. It all depends on the details of your situation. Here's one way to skin the cat.
who should handle the creation of the copy of the entity? (master or detail)
I see the master as an in-memory list representation of a subset of persisted entities. I would allow the master to handle any changes to its list. The list itself could be a custom collection. Use an ItemChanged event to fire a notification to the master that an item has been updated and needs to be persisted. Fire a NewItem event to notify the master of an insert.
we use copyFrom() to prevent having to replace entities in a collection which could cause references to break. Is there a better way to do this? (implementing copyFrom() can be tricky)
Instead of using copyFrom(), I would pass the existing reference to the details popup. If you're using an enumerable collection to store the master list, you can pass the object returned from list[index] to the details window. The reference itself will be altered so there's no need to use any kind of Replace method on the list. When OK is pressed, fire that ItemChanged event. You can even pass the index so it knows which object to update.
new entities receive an id of -1 (which the server tier/hibernate uses to differentiate between an insert or an update). This could potentially cause problems when looking up (cached) entities by id before they are saved. Should we use a temporary unique id for each new entity instead?
Are changes not immediately persisted? Use a Hibernate Session with the Unit of Work pattern to determine what's being inserted and what's being updated. There are more examples of Unit of Work out there. You might have to check out some blog posts by the .NET community if there's not much on the Java end. The concept is the same animal either way.
Hope this helps!
The CSLA library can help with this situation a lot.
However, if you want to self implement :
You have a master object, the master object contains a list of child objects.
The detail form can edit a child object directly. Since everything is reference types, the master object is automatically updated.
The issue is knowing that the master object is dirty, and therefore should be persisted to your database or whatnot.
CSLA handles this with an IsDirty() property. In the master object you would query each child object to see if it is dirty, and if so persist everything (as well as tracking if the master object itself is dirty)
You can also handle this is the INotifyPropertyChanged interface.
As for some of your other questions :
You want to separate your logic. The entity can handle storage of its own properties, and integrity rules for itself, but logic for how different object interact with each other should be separate. Look into patterns such as MVC or MVP.
In this case, creation of a new child object should either be in the master object, or should be in a separate business logic object that creates the child and then adds it to the parent.
For IDs, using GUIDs as the ID can save you quite a bit of problems, because then you don't have to talk to the database to determine a correct ID. You can keep a flag on the object for if it is new or not (and therefore should be inserted or updated).
Again, CSLA handles all of this for you, but does have quite a bit of overhead.
regarding undo on cancel : CSLA has n-level undo implemented, but if you are trying to do it by hand, I would either use your CopyFrom function, or refresh the object's data from the persistance layer on cancel (re-fetch).
i just implemented such a model.but not using NH, i am using my own code to persist objects in Oracle Db.
i have used the master detail concept in the same web form.
like i have master entity grid and on detail action command i open a penal just below the clicked master record row.
On Detail Add mode, i just populate an empty entity whose id were generated in negative numbers by a static field.and on Save Detail button i saved that entity in the details list of the Master Record in Asp.NET Session.
On Detail Edit,View i populated the Detail Panel with selected Detail through ajax calls using Jquery and appended that penal just below the clicked row.
On Save Button i persisted the Master Session (containing list of Details) in database.
and i worked good for me as if multiple details a master need to fill.
also if you like you can use Jquery Modal to Popup that Panel instead of appending below the row.
Hope it helps :)
Thanks,