Multiple Location Inventory Design

John Esak john at valar.com
Fri Mar 26 08:32:23 PDT 2010


I'm not going anywhere when it comes to filePro... For better or worse I
wrapped my life around it. Sounds like a marriage, huh?  Well, wait a
minute... I am divorced...   Oh, but that was only a woman. :-)    (Karen
would kill me if she saw this.  :-)

John
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis Malen [mailto:dmalen at malen.com] 
> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 10:48 AM
> To: john at valar.com; filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: Re: Multiple Location Inventory Design
> 
> John,
> 
> I wish everyone felt the way you do. filePro has its place. I 
> too considered 
> leaving but have not - yet!As long as I can do some of the 
> 21st century 
> things that has to be done. For example, we need to be able 
> to automate a 
> process which logs on to a website (not ftp). Click on the 
> correct parts of 
> the site, perhaps answer some questions and either upload or 
> download a 
> file.
> 
> If we can't do these types of things easily we may have to 
> leave filepro. I 
> understand that this involves communication with the outside 
> world which 
> should not affect keeping filepro.
> 
> My other concern is as we get older that people like you will 
> eventually 
> lose interest in the filepro community and filepro will fade 
> away. Then, 
> instead of having built something of value over all these 
> years, it will be 
> lost and I have to reinvent the wheel with a new platform/package.
> 
> As you may remember, we had a one day meeting which the 
> Hoover's were kind 
> enough to host. I still inquire periodically what the status 
> is of some of 
> our suggested initiatives but that seems to have gone nowhere.
> 
> Please stay involved. Your involvement, and others, has 
> always encouraged me 
> to try new things with filepro as I am sure it has for others.
> 
> Dennis Malen
> 516.479.5912
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John Esak" <john at valar.com>
> To: "'filePro'" <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 9:48 AM
> Subject: RE: Multiple Location Inventory Design
> 
> 
> >
> > So Walter,
> >
> > Who has written an ERPS system in filePro?  Or are you just 
> not really
> > answering his question and telling him to dump his 20 year 
> legacy system. 
> > If
> > so, isn't that getting a little old?  Do you think we could 
> just all agree
> > to drop that kind of answer when someone specifically asks for help 
> > writing
> > in filePro?  There are just the few of us who have this 
> need seemingly, if
> > you don't, why not traffic in the ERP chat room of your 
> choice instead?
> >
> > I mean if you need to hear it or anyone needs to hear it 
> yet again. I'll
> > state it once and all for the record... "Yes, if you want to go with
> > mainstream software and tools, don't stay modifying your 
> filePro system, 
> > it
> > won't be profitable or useful in the long run."  Does that 
> satisfy you. I
> > think everyone here knows that, will agree to it and could 
> we please just 
> > be
> > done with those kinds of threads?  We buy it, you're right, 
> we're all 
> > wrong
> > for keeping up systems that have worked for two and a half 
> decades.  We
> > understand that you and the world has moved on... It does 
> not behoove this
> > technical forum that deals with help on code basically... 
> To once again 
> > hear
> > how it all can be done so much better with the latest ERP 
> bla, bla has to
> > offer.  C'mon, if you have a reason to watch and contribute 
> to the forum,
> > great, but if it is your idea to suggest people move off of 
> filePro to
> > answer their question about how one should approach something in 
> > filePro...
> > It is entirely counter productive.  If you agree with me, 
> put up some file
> > layouts, put up code like the others have done.  If you 
> disagree... Well, 
> > I
> > would appreciate it if you answer this privately and don't 
> turn this into
> > what you apparently wanted it to become with your first answer.
> >
> > In the past 6 months I have had 3 serious, extended, 
> multi-day discussions
> > with 3 serious, long-time users of filePro systems who are 
> going through 
> > the
> > agonizing decisions to move away from it into the whole new 
> world that's 
> > out
> > there... Or continue to use it and merge whatever they can 
> (as time, money
> > and energy permits) with newer solutions. The definitive 
> answer has been 
> > in
> > all 3 discussions with all 3 companies, yes, if you want a 
> far reaching,
> > complete solution that will bring your company far into the 
> future, move
> > away from filePro and make the commitment. In all 3 cases, 
> (and they all
> > frequent this forum) it was determined that making such a 
> commitment would
> > mean over a year of conversion/transfer/ramp-up time and 
> low to middle 6
> > figures to finance it. At this point, 1 of the 3 companies 
> chose that 
> > route.
> > The other two are still considering their options with one 
> leaning heavily
> > toward keeping filePro, and one leaning slightly away from 
> filePro.  In 
> > all
> > 3 cases, however, should one them ask a specific question 
> up here on "the
> > filePro mailing list" about how to accomplish something in 
> filePro, I and
> > several others happily, have had the courtesy and time to give good 
> > answers.
> > You on the other hand, didn't have the time, and overlooked 
> the courtesy 
> > of
> > allowing those who still use and want to use filePro to do 
> so. Do you 
> > really
> > not think that's a fair way to approach this mailing list?
> >
> > And in case anyone thinks I took one side or the other in 
> the move away 
> > from
> > filePro discussions, I did not.  However, up here in this 
> place, I would
> > continue to strongly suggest that filePro can still handle 
> just about any
> > situation typical companies might need. Can it do it with mouse
> > accessibility and RDBMS implementation, no.  Is this a 
> requirement? For
> > some, yes, for others, no... And that is why I, at least 
> still work on and
> > for this forum?  Why do you?  To constantly enter into 
> philosophical or 
> > even
> > hard-nosed discussions of the benefits of leaving filePro?  
> If so, I 
> > submit
> > that if people want that discussion they should get it from paid 
> > consultants
> > off line... Not in a decidedly technical pretty much 
> code-based forum. Or,
> > at least in OT: marked threads.
> >
> > I re-read this note and I know you're going to read it as 
> heavy handed, 
> > but
> > when will it ever be time for people to just deal with the 
> questions as 
> > they
> > are put and not include in the answer or have the whole 
> answer be the
> > suggestion to use a different tool than filePro. That is 
> simply not what
> > it's all about here, and you,
> > Walter, certainly know that.
> >
> > John Esak
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com
> >> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.co
> > m] On Behalf Of Walter Vaughan
> >> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 6:29 AM
> >> To: filePro
> >> Subject: Re: Multiple Location Inventory Design
> >>
> >> Top posted reply
> >>
> >> You also might think about not re-inventing the wheel. 
> ERP's with any
> >> sort of WMS
> >> functionality handle this and way more with years of
> >> debugging already done.
> >> This will only get more complex over time. You may owe it to your
> >> customer to
> >> investigate solutions where the customizations are at the business
> >> process level
> >> and not re-invent standard supply chain methods/systems.
> >>
> >>
> >> Craig Tooker wrote:
> >>
> >> >On 3/25/10 17:37, Scott Walker wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>I have an order processing system.  Currently it only
> >> handles inventory kept
> >> >>in one location.  Now a customer wants to start keeping 
> inventory at
> >> >>multiple locations.  So the same part# could be in the
> >> inventory at the main
> >> >>office and also at several branch offices.  I'm just
> >> starting to think of
> >> >>the design of this.  Should I have a separate record in the
> >> inventory file
> >> >>for each part#/location combination?  Should I use a
> >> qualified file for each
> >> >>of the inventory of each location? (I don't use qualified
> >> files for anything
> >> >>at the moment).   Of course, this design decision 
> permeates itself
> >> >>throughout the system (ie.  Order Entry, Shipping,
> >> Purchasing, etc).  Any
> >> >>design ideas or thoughts would be appreciated.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >You should of course, keep the SKU related information
> >> (everything but
> >> >vendor, qtys and locations) in the inventory item master file.
> >> >
> >> >A detail level file for vendors that supply the item should
> >> be kept to
> >> >allow you to sell items from multiple vendors under one SKU
> >> (in the case
> >> >of commodity items or where you have multiple vendors
> >> supplying the same
> >> >item).  A vendor ID can then become part of an item
> >> available level.
> >> >Each vendor will have their own costing and delivery and
> >> this will allow
> >> >you keep them separate as layers of inventory (for purposes
> >> of costing
> >> >and implementing FIFO or LIFO).
> >> >
> >> >A detail level file that contains itemID, location, qty,
> >> vendor, costing
> >> >and date should be kept - again for purposes of costing and
> >> FIFO/LIFO.
> >> >Additionally you can then implement a stock locating system for
> >> >efficient picking and correct allocation under the FIFO or
> >> LIFO logic.
> >> >This allows you to direct material handlers for picking items for
> >> >invoicing or stacking items from orders.
> >> >
> >> >You could keep accumulators in the master record for 
> total on-hand,
> >> >available, allocated and on-order if you wish but it is 
> not required
> >> >(although it may make certain operations more efficient.
> >> >
> >> >Efficiency is also helped if you make that item detail level
> >> layout the
> >> >same for the PO detail (where you purchase the item) and
> >> also on invoice
> >> >detail (where you sell the items).  That will make the
> >> management of the
> >> >data straight forward and gives you the ability to make use
> >> of COPY (and
> >> >its friends).
> >> >
> >> >Craig Tooker
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >_______________________________________________
> >> >Filepro-list mailing list
> >> >Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> >> >http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> -------------- next part --------------
> >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >> URL:
> >> http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachment
> > s/20100326/39a5a8a3/attachment.html
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Filepro-list mailing list
> >> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> >> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Filepro-list mailing list
> > Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list 
> 



More information about the Filepro-list mailing list