Project mgr - change resource (staff) rate from default

[FGomez]

HI all,

I am looking to change the rate of a resource assigned to a project. So 
timesheet are based per such HrRate vs the default rate in defined in GL 
global accounting.


The user has permission with 'project mgr admin and accounting role' but 
don't have enough permission to change 'default rate' for a given 
ressource.


Can any one provide the security needed to allow this change?


Regards,
Fernando

Re: different Invoice types with same Invoice ID range -> Chilean case

[Gabriel Oberreuter]

Fe de erratas:

We use "partyIdFrom" instead of "partyId".


Gabriel Oberreuter wrote
> For the record, at the end we implemented it like this:
> 
> 1) Add new fields for entity Invoice: invoiceTypeSII and invoiceNumberSII.
> invoiceTypeSII is defined by the Tax Authority (SII) in Chile and must be
> implemented strictly by their specification. It is "similar" to ofbiz OOTB
> invoiceTypeId (like SALES_INVOICE), but we decided that it was easier to
> just implement a new field for this. invoiceNumberSII is the "folio": each
> invoice issued in Chile must have a number (BigInteger), and those numbers
> must be previously approved by SII before using them. (in fact, one has to
> submit a request of a range of these folios to SII).
> 
> 2) The ID of an Invoice (in Chile, generally speaking), is unique
> nationwide if one consider: the ID of the company who issue the invoice
> (the RUT, like the tax id in USA), the invoiceNumberSII, and the
> invoiceTypeSII. So, for us to keep control of this uniqueness, we build
> the invoiceId ourselves, using those 3 parameters:
> invoiceId = 
> 
> _
> 
> _
> 
> And for Party, we defined partyId as the RUT for each company in Chile.
> 
> Hope this help someone else.





--
View this message in context: 
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/different-Invoice-types-with-same-Invoice-ID-range-Chilean-case-tp4672808p4676260.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: different Invoice types with same Invoice ID range -> Chilean case

[Gabriel Oberreuter]

For the record, at the end we implemented it like this:

1) Add new fields for entity Invoice: invoiceTypeSII and invoiceNumberSII.
invoiceTypeSII is defined by the Tax Authority (SII) in Chile and must be
implemented strictly by their specification. It is "similar" to ofbiz OOTB
invoiceTypeId (like SALES_INVOICE), but we decided that it was easier to
just implement a new field for this. invoiceNumberSII is the "folio": each
invoice issued in Chile must have a number (BigInteger), and those numbers
must be previously approved by SII before using them. (in fact, one has to
submit a request of a range of these folios to SII).

2) The ID of an Invoice (in Chile, generally speaking), is unique nationwide
if one consider: the ID of the company who issue the invoice (the RUT, like
the tax id in USA), the invoiceNumberSII, and the invoiceTypeSII. So, for us
to keep control of this uniqueness, we build the invoiceId ourselves, using
those 3 parameters:
invoiceId = __

And for Party, we defined partyId as the RUT for each company in Chile.

Hope this help someone else.



--
View this message in context: 
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/different-Invoice-types-with-same-Invoice-ID-range-Chilean-case-tp4672808p4676257.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: get all fields of an Entity

[Gabriel Oberreuter]

Jeremy Olmstead wrote
> If you pass null as your set of fields, it will select all fields.
> 
> Jeremy

Oh, thanks. That works great to select all fields when executing the query.

I still need to get all fields of an entity at other parts of our code, do
you know how to achieve this?




--
View this message in context: 
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/get-all-fields-of-an-Entity-tp4676259p4676262.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

get all fields of an Entity

[Gabriel Oberreuter]

Hi all,

Do anyone knows how to get all fields of a given Entity programmatically? I
can't seem to find that functionality of just lack the java knowledge to
just do it.

I am creating a query and want to select "all" current fields of an entity.
When executing the query, I can pass a Set of fields to select. I need
something of the like:

Set fieldsOfEntityInvoice = Invoice.getAllEntityFields();

For now, I am building the Set manually, adding each field of the entities
using set.add("invoiceId"), for example.

Thanks



--
View this message in context: 
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/get-all-fields-of-an-Entity-tp4676259.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Adrian Crum

[Gabriel Oberreuter]

Sad news, my sincere condolences of him.



--
View this message in context: 
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Adrian-Crum-tp4675676p4676258.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: get all fields of an Entity

[Jeremy Olmstead]

Something like this should work:

ModelEntity modelEntity = delegator.getModelEntity("Invoice");
List fieldNames = modelEntity.getAllFieldNames();


On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Gabriel Oberreuter 
wrote:

> Jeremy Olmstead wrote
> > If you pass null as your set of fields, it will select all fields.
> >
> > Jeremy
>
> Oh, thanks. That works great to select all fields when executing the query.
>
> I still need to get all fields of an entity at other parts of our code, do
> you know how to achieve this?
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/get-all-fields-of-an-Entity-tp4676259p4676262.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

Re: get all fields of an Entity

[Jeremy Olmstead]

If you pass null as your set of fields, it will select all fields.

Jeremy

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Gabriel Oberreuter 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Do anyone knows how to get all fields of a given Entity programmatically? I
> can't seem to find that functionality of just lack the java knowledge to
> just do it.
>
> I am creating a query and want to select "all" current fields of an entity.
> When executing the query, I can pass a Set of fields to select. I need
> something of the like:
>
> Set fieldsOfEntityInvoice = Invoice.getAllEntityFields();
>
> For now, I am building the Set manually, adding each field of the entities
> using set.add("invoiceId"), for example.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/get-all-fields-of-an-Entity-tp4676259.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

Re: An index number appended to utilCacheTable names when there are conflicts?

[Scott Gray]

It's most likely a race condition in the UtilCache getOrCreate method (the
exact name escapes me without looking). Does it a actually cause any issues
or is it just strange?
On 20 Jan 2016 11:41, "Len Shein"  wrote:

> All,
>
> There have been instances where one or more of the entitycache store gets
> an
> index number appended to it's name.
>
> The UtilCache.java file has the following notation:
>
>
>
> /** An index number appended to utilCacheTable names when there are
> conflicts. */
>
> private final static ConcurrentHashMap
> defaultIndices = new ConcurrentHashMap();
>
>
>
> Does anyone know what kind of conflict would cause a cache store to get
> such
> an index number?
>
> Also the original named cache is no longer present in the cache store list?
>
>
>
> For example:
>
>  entitycache.entity.default.ProdCatalog1
>
> And the original is gone.
>
>  entitycache.entity.default.ProdCatalog
>
>
>
> Note: This is occurring in a clustered environment which we are using
> ActiveMQ to distribute our cache clearing.
>
>
>
> Len Shein
>
> lsh...@solveda.com
>
> O: 516.742.7888 x225
>
> O: 732.333.4303
>
> C: 917.882.8515
>
>

RE: An index number appended to utilCacheTable names when there are conflicts?

[Len Shein]

It does cause issues since it seems the original cache (without the 1) does not 
properly clear.
In my situation it happens to be the DataResource cache.
As you know Content is stored in the three cache stores Content, DataResource, 
Electronic Text. 
We are in a clustered environment using ActiveMQ to distribute the cache clear.
In our case on the second instance the DataResource cache was in conflict and 
therefore named DataResoure1.
When the first instance updated its cache store the DataResource cache on the 
second instance never gets cleared.  I believe due to the fact it seemingly is 
not there by the same name, on the second instances' cache store list.

The odd thing when viewing the list of cache stores via webtools.  We see the 
cache store with the 1 appended,  and it shows the 'stats' of this cache.  
However when clicking on the any of the 'detail' links we get cache store not 
found.  Removing the '1' from the URl parameter line does then properly show 
the detail of the 'original' cache. If the cache store is subsequently 
'cleared'; of course it then shows the correct data on ecommerce site.

The method is UtilCache.getOrCreateUtilCache; if the cache determines the file 
to be 'unsafe' it executes compareAndSwapInt. What I am puzzled at is what is 
the conflict or unsafe which causes the next atomic number to be generated?
 
Regards
Len

-Original Message-
From: Scott Gray [mailto:scott.g...@hotwaxsystems.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 4:33 AM
To: user@ofbiz.apache.org
Subject: Re: An index number appended to utilCacheTable names when there are 
conflicts?

It's most likely a race condition in the UtilCache getOrCreate method (the 
exact name escapes me without looking). Does it a actually cause any issues or 
is it just strange?
On 20 Jan 2016 11:41, "Len Shein"  wrote:

> All,
>
> There have been instances where one or more of the entitycache store 
> gets an index number appended to it's name.
>
> The UtilCache.java file has the following notation:
>
>
>
> /** An index number appended to utilCacheTable names when there 
> are conflicts. */
>
> private final static ConcurrentHashMap 
> defaultIndices = new ConcurrentHashMap();
>
>
>
> Does anyone know what kind of conflict would cause a cache store to 
> get such an index number?
>
> Also the original named cache is no longer present in the cache store list?
>
>
>
> For example:
>
>  entitycache.entity.default.ProdCatalog1
>
> And the original is gone.
>
>  entitycache.entity.default.ProdCatalog
>
>
>
> Note: This is occurring in a clustered environment which we are using 
> ActiveMQ to distribute our cache clearing.
>
>
>
> Len Shein
>
> lsh...@solveda.com
>
> O: 516.742.7888 x225
>
> O: 732.333.4303
>
> C: 917.882.8515
>
>