ArcherPoint Microsoft Dynamics NAV Developer Digest - vol 8

ArcherPoint Microsoft Dynamics NAV Developer Digest - vol 8

The ArcherPoint technical staff—made up of developers, project managers, and consultants – is constantly communicating internally, with the goal of sharing helpful information with one another.

As they run into issues and questions, find the answers, and make new discoveries, they post them companywide on Yammer for everyone’s benefit. We in Marketing watch these interactions and never cease to be amazed by the creativity, dedication, and brainpower we’re so fortunate to have in this group—so we thought, wouldn’t it be great to share them with the rest of the Microsoft Dynamics NAV Community? So, the ArcherPoint Microsoft Dynamics NAV Developer Digest was born. Each week, we present a collection of thoughts and findings from the ArcherPoint staff. We hope these insights will benefit you, too.

Jon Long on locating Platform and Application Build:

To find the Platform Build is easy, to find the Object(Application) Build is slightly less easy. Open Codeunit 1 and look in the function called ApplicationBuild. Or simply look at the version list of Codeunit 1. ApplicationBuild is not called anymore when you click on Help/About. So, there’s no out-of-the-box way to find the ObjectBuild from an RTC client. At least as far as I can tell. I’d be happy if someone could prove me wrong.

Faithie Robertson on a NAV 2013 and NAV 2013 R2 issue (is this a bug?):

NAV2013 and NAV2013R2 bug: When using configuration templates (aka Master Template) to apply two related key fields to a record (such as Shipping Agent, and Shipping Agent Service Code to a Customer record), you will receive an error (see attachment) on the second field because it will only use the single field to validate the key in the Shipping Agent Service Code. This makes it impossible to add a valid Shipping Agent Service Code to the template.

I created a support case for this, and here’s Microsoft’s Solution:


 Thanks for the screenshot. I see you are receiving the following error in the Config. Template Header:

“The field Shipping Agent Service Code of table Customer contains a value (GND) that cannot be found in the related table (Shipping Agent Services ).”

I replicated this error from my tests. Forgive me, but it has been awhile since I have worked with configuration templates. I seem to remember getting this message in the past for certain fields that were added to a template. If you ticked ‘Skip Relation Check’, closed the configuration template, re-opened it, you should be able to un-tick the option and close without error. I was able to do this from my test. I can’t remember the exact reason why this worked. I can’t find any write-ups/bugs on this.

Please try this in the customer environment and see if this workaround gets you past the error. I will continue to search for the reason on this workaround. If I don’t find anything, I’ll write-up a collaboration request for more info.

<<<<  The solution above does work, with one caveat. You CAN store invalid data as the default value on the template. Then when you try to use the template, you'll receive an error like the second screenshot below. (Which means if you code the use of the template through a process, expect your process to need some error handling.) Config Template Table Relation Test Error


Alan Lyczkowski on Column Layouts:

I just ran across this and thought it would be a great tool for our toolkit. It shows a Listing of How to setup some Column Layouts to achieve different results in Account Schedules.

Account Schedule Formulas

Alan Campbell shared this article about what happens when agile doesn’t work:

Agile Doesn’t Work

Is agile the problem, or the people? Read the article and decide for yourself.

Alan Lyczkowski on the Universal XMLPort Tool:

I have used this tool in the past to load data into NAV 2009 and NAV 2013. It is pretty easy to use, and works well. Just follow the link for more information.

Universal XMLPort tool

This tool is a must on 2013 RTC projects in my opinion. It sure beats creating a separate XMLport for every table.

Trending Posts

Stay Informed

Choose Your Preferences
First Name
Last Name
Subscription Options
Your Privacy is Guaranteed