What's missing?

Yahoo Archive
1
> Here is the body of a BAQ, which shows any part flagged as a
> manufactured part, which does not have an attached Method of
> manufacture. I think this is what you were probably after!
>
> for each Part Where Part.Company = cur-comp
> and Part.TypeCode = 'M' and
> Part.Method = no no-lock
> BY Part.PartNum:
>
> If you paste this into your own BAQ, and select any fields you desire
> returned by the query, it should work for you.

Certainly a flag that tells one if a method exists on a part is quite good to
know! That makes this particular BAQ extremely easy, now doesn't it? ;-)

In a more general sense, I am used to looking for missing records using SQL
statements by doing an outer-join and then searching for a null field in the
target set. Just out of curiosity, is there a way to do something similar with
Progress in a BAQ?

BTW, at least in our version of Vantage (8.0 and 8.03), there is no way to
paste the Progress text into the query. I've always had to use the dreaded
"Phrase Builder".

Thanks for your help!

Mark W.
2
We are trying to create some BAQs to help identify Make (or Kits) without REVs
(where rev control is on), and BOMs and BOOs. We create the link between the
two tables and check the outer-join box. I assume that the criteria, which
says show me records where Company is blank, would restrict the records to
only those where the company is blank. It does but even for records where the
company isn't blank. We may just do this in Crystal but a BAQ would be much
more useful. Any thoughts from those of you who are not on the roulette table?

Mark W.
3
Not sure where you are going with this one Mark. It is my understanding
that you cannot have a BOM for a part without first creating a revision
to attach it to. So every part with a BOM must therefore have a
revision.

Next, when you start to filter records for your BAQ, using your current
company as a filter will speed up the query. However, I believe no parts
will have a blank company, Vantage fills this field in for you. So you
need to join tables with a another linking field. For Kits, I would be
looking at joining PartMtl and PartOpr Tables to the Part Table, by
joining the Company and Part Number fields. It will be much simpler to
only look at material or operations on their own, if you can determine
which one to focus on, querying both at once would be very messy I
reckon.



Stuart Noble
Thompson Meat Machinery
stuart@...
Ph: 61 7 3803 6643

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Mark Wonsil
Sent: Wednesday, 25 October 2006 11:57 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] What's missing?



We are trying to create some BAQs to help identify Make (or Kits)
without REVs
(where rev control is on), and BOMs and BOOs. We create the link between
the
two tables and check the outer-join box. I assume that the criteria,
which
says show me records where Company is blank, would restrict the records
to
only those where the company is blank. It does but even for records
where the
company isn't blank. We may just do this in Crystal but a BAQ would be
much
more useful. Any thoughts from those of you who are not on the roulette
table?

Mark W.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
4
Sorry Mark, got a bit carried away on my first reply, thinking more
about a problem we are having here trying to generate a Bill of
Materials for a part which is easy to follow for our customers!



This might be more to the point you were after.



Here is the body of a BAQ, which shows any part flagged as a
manufactured part, which does not have an attached Method of
manufacture. I think this is what you were probably after!



for each Part Where Part.Company = cur-comp

and Part.TypeCode = 'M' and

Part.Method = no no-lock

BY Part.PartNum:



If you paste this into your own BAQ, and select any fields you desire
returned by the query, it should work for you.



Hopefully between my two rambling posts, I have helped in some way!



Cheers

Stuart



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]