Question About Fixed Asset Maintenance maintHistSeqId

[Adrian Crum]

I'm having a bit of a problem working with fixed asset maintenances.
Sometimes all that is known (a request parameter for instance) is the
maintHistSeqId. There is no way to locate a matching FixedAssetMaint
because multiple FixedAssetMaint records could have the same maintHistSeqId.

Is there a reason it was set up this way? Why wouldn't we want
maintHistSeqId to be unique?

-Adrian

[David E Jones]

Your argument is based on the assertion that sometimes all you have is  
the maintHistSeqId. Why is that?

-David


On Jul 24, 2008, at 3:36 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:

> I'm having a bit of a problem working with fixed asset maintenances.  
> Sometimes all that is known (a request parameter for instance) is  
> the maintHistSeqId. There is no way to locate a matching  
> FixedAssetMaint because multiple FixedAssetMaint records could have  
> the same maintHistSeqId.
>
> Is there a reason it was set up this way? Why wouldn't we want  
> maintHistSeqId to be unique?
>
> -Adrian

[Adrian Crum]

Never mind. I went back through the code and made sure a fixedAssetId is
always available.

-Adrian

David E Jones wrote:

>
> Your argument is based on the assertion that sometimes all you have is
> the maintHistSeqId. Why is that?
>
> -David
>
>
> On Jul 24, 2008, at 3:36 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>
>> I'm having a bit of a problem working with fixed asset maintenances.
>> Sometimes all that is known (a request parameter for instance) is the
>> maintHistSeqId. There is no way to locate a matching FixedAssetMaint
>> because multiple FixedAssetMaint records could have the same
>> maintHistSeqId.
>>
>> Is there a reason it was set up this way? Why wouldn't we want
>> maintHistSeqId to be unique?
>>
>> -Adrian
>
>