Comments
The current configuration is global per entity and applies the same task count to every execution above a single threshold, regardless of the actual volume or legal entity.For example, with a threshold of 200 records and a task count of 8:An import of 20,000 products creates 8 tasks of roughly 2,500 records each, where parallel processing is likely beneficial.An import of 2,000 products also creates 8 tasks, now with only around 250 records each. This consumes the same batch/AOS capacity while potentially adding more scheduling and partitioning overhead than performance benefit.A more adaptive design could support either:Multiple volume bands per entity, such as 2 tasks above 400 records, 4 tasks above 1,500, and 8 tasks above 10,000; orA target records-per-task value combined with a maximum task count.This would allow DMF to calculate an appropriate degree of parallelism for each execution rather than treating every import above the threshold identically
This feature / function is required not only for Intercompany orders but also how all purchase returns (real purchase returns or purchase order with negative qty) are handled in WMS App. We need function to release to warehouse lines which have a 'negative' (stock removal) indication. This should work in similar way how the Sales Pick / Put work - just that the reference has to be of a 'Vendor ID' instead of a 'Customer'. Do you have any news or currently this is in MS roadmap? Thanks in advance.
Adding support for this idea based on a live customer implementation running a 5-4-4 fiscal calendar.Asset leasing derives its schedules from the lease payment and compounding frequency, which supports Monthly, Quarterly, Semiannual and Annual only, and does not reference the legal entity's fiscal calendar. The practical consequence is not simply a date mismatch. On a 5-4-4 calendar, a 5-week period and a 4-week period must carry different interest and lease expense values, and there is currently no way to produce that split. Re-dating the generated journal lines before posting only moves a monthly value to a different date, so it does not address the requirement.The impact is also uneven across the postings. Right-of-use asset depreciation can be aligned where the ROU asset is linked to Fixed assets, since that module does support a fiscal calendar. Interest recognition, lease liability amortization and the short-term liability reclass have no equivalent option. The short-term liability reclass is the most constrained of the three, because the reclass and its reversal share a single voucher.The only approach available today is to post the generated monthly entries and then reclass interest and lease expense into the correct fiscal period manually at period end. That is an accounting workaround rather than a product capability, it carries audit and reconciliation overhead, and it does not scale where an organization is onboarding a high volume of leases across multiple legal entities.Retail, hospitality and manufacturing organizations commonly report on 5-4-4, 4-5-4 or 4-4-5 calendars, and lease accounting is precisely the area where period alignment matters for close and statutory reporting. Allowing batch journal creation to honor the fiscal calendar period start and end dates, in the same way Fixed assets already does, would close this gap.