From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[email protected]>
On Mar 27, 2010, at 6:51 PM, Robert Morley wrote:
Yep; when I attempted to do variance on inventory items for serialized inventory I traveled down that path to the ECA you are
referring to. The trouble is that there is another ECA defined a couple of lines up ...
<eca entity="InventoryItem" operation="create-store" event="return">
<action service="updateSerializedInventoryTotals" mode="sync"/>
</eca>
And this one does the set the QOH/ATP based on the status (for serialized only). So after the ECA is fired and updates the
InventoryItem to put them in line based on the detail, this one turns around and updates them again and potentially puts them
back out of wack.
Yes, I know that serialized items are based on statusId rather than inventoryitemdetails and I agree that it would be good to
reconcile them to the non-serialized logic.
As for the use case for "held" inventory items. If that is a reasonable use case then I agree 100%. What we do is use location
for these situations -- for example, when a PO is received we allow the user to receive the inventory into a specific location.
So if there is a "review" location that is not pickable then it may move there. Otherwise, it may move into a stockroom location
that would be pickable.
Putting inventory items on "hold" is perfectly reasonable. I would have to look at the code again, but I wonder how this is done
for non-serialized items.
I don't know about serialized inventory, I know there are some OFBiz instances in production that are using on-hold status for
non-serialized inventory.
Does it break the "bundle" of items (InventoryItem) into two so that one can be on "hold" while the other one can have no
status? Currently, the "INV_ON_HOLD" is defined under a "SERIALIZED_INV_ITEM" parent so it is actually somewhat invalid to even
set this on non-serialized items.
The one I am talking about is INV_NS_ON_HOLD
Jacopo, if I start to make some changes based on our discussions would you be
willing to to review the changes?
Sure.
To all committers: do you agree with the plan to reimplement serialized inventory QOH/ATP to be based on InventoryItemDetail
rather than InventoryItem.statusId?
Just to be sure to completly understand: does anybody knows why it's done with
InventoryItem.statusId for the moment?
Thanks
Jacques
Kind regards,
Jacopo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 12:22:47 PM
Subject: Re: Resolving inconsistency between serialized and non-serialized
inventory
On Mar 27, 2010, at 3:03 PM, Robert Morley wrote:
There is a balance inventory items service that executes and keeps the details and materialized QOH/ATP in-line. And this
service does it for both types of inventory items -- the trouble is that there is another service that executes specifically for
serialized inventory items and it hardcodes the values based on the status. Something like if "AVAILABLE" set 1/1, if
"DELIVERED" set 0/0, else set it to 1/0. When you stop doing this I think you notice that the InventoryItemDetail is not
created for serialized inventory when products are received.
I was referring to the following eca:
<!-- The InventoryItemDetail entity should never be updated/stored or
deleted/removed, but we'll catch those too anyway... -->
<eca entity="InventoryItemDetail" operation="create-store-remove"
event="return">
<action service="updateInventoryItemFromDetail" mode="sync"/>
</eca>
Your comment about holds is interesting -- I wonder, however, where the use
case is to hold individual item pieces.
For example you receive some items into the warehouse, and you want to "hold"
them before quality control etc..
Jacopo
For example, I would have thought if you are doing an order and want to put it on hold it effectively has the items on hold.
Same with a transfer, etc. I would have thought that doing these things would do a reservation against the inventory items and
reduce the ATP. To do otherwise would require breaking non-serialized inventory items into buckets each time you want to "hold"
a few. But I could certainly be wrong here ...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 5:15:24 AM
Subject: Re: Resolving inconsistency between serialized and non-serialized
inventory
On Mar 26, 2010, at 8:46 PM, Bob Morley wrote:
- consider an enhancement to existing presentment based services that
prevents the QOH/ATP values from being set directly. The line of thinking
is that they should be materialized via ECA based on operations to the
InventoryItemDetail entity.
Isn't this already done in this way?
Jacopo
