[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Inventory class proposal
From: |
Reinhard Müller |
Subject: |
Re: Inventory class proposal |
Date: |
Thu, 2 Nov 2000 21:26:10 +0100 |
Am Don, 02 Nov 2000 09:02:46 schrieb(en) Georg Lehner:
> item:
> key: varchar(20) short description, "human" understandable
> key
> internal_code: varchar(35) "our" article code
> name1: text
> name2: text
> name3: text
> group1: varchar(35) Article category. I have seen, that
> Accounting
> group2: varchar(35) Department has peculiar interpretation
> so I
> group3: varchar(35) provide different grouping categories for
> ledger, controlling, and ... reserved.
Like you, I don't like too short fields; but I don't see a use for
35 character long grouping code.
> Quantities:
>
> From problems I had with a 15.3 approach I would suggest to register
> in inventory by the smallest unit of the product,measured in
> long-integer with fixed-coma notation, say:
>
> qty: longint
> decimals: int
>
> decimals is an item attribute (property, field, column...)
>
> example1: 12.65 kg of gold dust, stored in mg (milligrams)
> would be stored as:
>
> qty = 12650000
> decimals = 0
>
> example2 (real):
> bunker-oil for our sterilizer vapor plant burner is
> delivered as 3 decimal fractions of galons:
> qty = 42695437
> decimal = 3
> ==> 42695.437 gal
This is actually the same as I proposed for storing currency. On the
one hand, it creates a lot of headache when you have to display such
values (on screen and on reports), on the other hand it would surely
be a good idea to use the same system for currency _and_ quantities.
> If we could use BCD we would be better off, at least when using SI
> units and derived: g, l, m, etc. and with decimal fractions. The ones
> who like to store in units of 1/16 gal would benefit from a binary
> notation for minimizing rounding errors.
>
> Next issue: units. We propose to field in item which refer to a
> selection list.
>
> multiplier: -->
> unit: -->
>
> multiplier_codes:
>
> key: varchar(10) `k',`m',`M',`u',`K' - letter(s) which
> appears
> before unit.
> conversion: float (?) kilo = 1000,
> milli = 1/1000,
> mega = 10^6,
> omicron = 10^-6,
> Kilo = 1024, - conversion factor to next
> SI unit or unity (1)
> comment: text Well, comment!
>
> unit_codes:
>
> key: varchar(15) `m', `g', `gal', `onz', - unit text
> comment: text meter, gram, gallones, ounces (in spanish
> onzas).
> So to describe 3.5 kilometers of aluminium wire gage 00 for a new
> high-voltage line we used: multiplier=k, unit=m -> km
>
> This allows us to dispatch our gold dust in kilograms while storing it
> in milligrams.
Still you have the problem when you once sell 600 m of a wire, and next
time you sell 20 kg. This example is not so far from practice.
> But that's not all on conversion stuff:
>
> Next issue: packages. We propose a package-> code for each item,
> packages are defined in a list.
>
> package:
> key: varchar(35) short name for the package form
> comment: text epic name for the package
> conversion: longint How much units of the base unit
> are
> kept in the package. The `decimals'
> field apply.
>
> What if we sell vine in bottles, but we buy vine in barrels.
>
> We would store it in liters, with three decimals.
>
> instances of package:
>
> key |comment |conversion
> barrel |Full Size Barrel with 45 l |45000
> halfbarrel|Hall Size Barrel with 20 l |20000
> bottle |standard bottle |00750
> champagne |Champagne bottle |02000
> 24 box |Box with 24 standard bottles|18000
> dozen |Box with 12 standard bottles|09000
>
> etc.
>
> If we buy three "barrel"s gnue stocks 135 l of wine, If we sell 5
> "bottle"s we reduce our stock by 3.75 l.
This is ok, but then we have to have this table per item, because
some kinds of wine are bottled 0.75 l and some are 0.7 l.
And, I would like to have a pseudo-item-number for each of these
packages. And actually an own price.
And actually it's own stock, because I want to know whether I have
enough bottled wine, or I have to fill some bottles from a barrel.
> Next Issue(s):
>
> I think that also volume, and weight should be standard with the item.
Yes. Volume, brut weight and net weight. Of course brut weight is
dependent on the package.
> At each provider the item has a different order number and description
> then we use, so we should register them there.
Order number yes, description no. At least not necessarily.
> Article numbers are propably missleading, as in some firm on article
> number is used for (sligthly) different products, while in others it
> is a real unique key.
Item numbers should IMHO always be an unique key in inventory.
> Question:
>
> Please explain what is "abcType" and "Cycle Count Frequency", and also
> the terms "value" and "rotation".
>
> Finally: where will the future discussion be pointed to?
The discussion should take place at address@hidden
Please all who are interested in this subscribe there.
Thanks
--
Reinhard Müller
BYTEWISE Software GmbH
address@hidden
www.bytewise.at