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