My country, the limit of transaction number(receipt number) not mor than 7 digit (1 million) after 1000000 the transaction number will go back u start transaction number 1
How should I do? the RMS 2.0 can config that.
My country, the limit of transaction number(receipt number) not mor than 7 digit (1 million) after 1000000 the transaction number will go back u start transaction number 1
How should I do? the RMS 2.0 can config that.
A seven-digit limit would be 9999999, not 1000000. If the limit is 1 million, then the max transactions would really be 999999.
I am confused. Is this a legal requirement? Where do you live? Will you serve jail time for violating this stupid law? I would never think about it again.
Tom
In my legal, the transaction number can't runing to infinity and my customer want to fix the max of transaction is 1000000 and after return to number 1
How should I config on RMS 2.0?
I don't think you can do it. For one thing it would probably screw up the reporting at the least, and crash the system at the worst. You are required to have unique ILC's for items and I would imagine it's the same for transaction numbers. It can probably be done but you would need to delete the old transactions so you could reuse the transaction #'s which would mean no historical reporting. Craig
If this is a customer requirement and not a legal requirement then forget it and tell the customer to use pre printed stationary with numbers and have the RMS transaction number suppressed from printing in the receipt xml. If this is a legal requirement then make a copy of the law and send this with the requirement to your dealer and to Microsoft and have them address it. But I very much doubt this to be a legal requirement. Also what happens after a few years when 2 customers come back with Invoice 555 - how is the system to know which 555 you are referring to. We could do a special development to create another numeration that goes back to 1 when it reaches the maximum and have that as a second reference invoice on the receipt and let Microsoft continue what they are doing. But this would require special development. If interested to discuss this more contact me.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required