This commit is contained in:
@@ -13,11 +13,16 @@ CONCURRENCY decision / research - updating, in bits seperately, entirely at once
|
||||
Things that might require an entire workorder graph be updated at once:
|
||||
Major header changes?
|
||||
Customer, Contract because pricing and policies might change?
|
||||
|
||||
Anything that affects balances and totals (are there new features happening showing dollar amounts billable right on workorder?)
|
||||
in v7 not an issue because need to preview report to see totals
|
||||
in v8 some talk of seeing totals, so need to determine if that's still a thing, if not then this whole class of concurrency issues dissappears
|
||||
This would be entirely resolved with a "view" showing a type of "invoice" summary kind of thing where you open that tab and it fetches and calcs and displays
|
||||
however this would be little difference from a report and a little worse because the end user can't edit it to calculate how they would like it to so...
|
||||
|
||||
ENTIRE GRAPH AFFECTING CHANGES
|
||||
One idea to support this is if a change is made at header that affects all children then change their concurrency values so updates will fail
|
||||
This is a good idea, need a clean way to support it but this makes sense
|
||||
|
||||
Dirty tracking at every level and object would save having to send entire workorder, just dirty bits
|
||||
i.e. have non-mapped dirty fields for every woitemrecord
|
||||
@@ -36,6 +41,21 @@ CONCURRENCY decision / research - updating, in bits seperately, entirely at once
|
||||
if locked then bumps back with error that wo is now locked (of course they could just change teh status in the header and resave I guess)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
########### PLANNING BELOW HERE, OUTDATED NOW ########################################
|
||||
Lot's to go in here but for now this is holding my planning and thoughts until can set in stone:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user