MLS/CUBS - Unable to create Other Accounts

[aebrown]

Reporting back. Now there seems to be even more of a bug in MLS. As I went in to add per info above, I noticed now we have 4 accounts of each as we tried last Sunday. We had new donations for Girls Camp, and I chose the first of the four accounts to add each of today's donations. I check the accounts and all of the day's records show up under the 3rd account of Girls camp. There is something not right in MLS/CUBS. First they don't show up, and didn't all week long, now today, they show up in 4 of the same account.

It sounds to me like this could just be the one issue where you didn't see the subcategories. If you don't see the subcategories while entering a donation, then you would create them again (which is what you essentially said you did). But you did actually create the subcategory each time. Now when you look at these in the list of categories, you see them. By no means am I saying that this isn't a problem, but it does seem that what you are reporting is consistent with simply not seeing the categories while entering a donation.

It does raise a related issue which has bothered me for some time -- MLS lets you create multiple subcategories with the exact same name. It would be easy enough to check for that and either automatically combine them or disallow the creation of such subcategories.

Then also, an account that was only setup one time in the "Other" account. Repeat, 1 creation. We now have 7 of those accounts (all named exactly the same). Actually it looks like for every entry under a single account it creates a new instance of the sub category under Other... is anyone else experiencing this? The relationship to these tables are out of sorts... Just dealing with the Other account is becoming a nightmare.

I'm certainly not seeing this problem. Are you certain there was only one creation? I assume you have other clerks and bishopric members who might possibly have created a subcategory. Given what you reported before, it appears that you created subcategories without thinking that you had actually been successful in doing so. Is it possible that others did the same thing?

And just to clarify, you keep referring to "Other". Is that just an abbreviated way of saying "Other:Authorized Member Financed Activities"? You shouldn't be able to create any subcategories directly under Other -- only under "Other:Authorized Member Financed Activities".

But in any case, if you do suspect that your database is messed up (which is certainly possible, given the symptoms you report), you really need to work with Local Unit Support. They can capture a copy of your database and have the developers analyze it to see what the root of the problem is.

[donaldbrooksby]

The multiple girls camp accounts would show from the multiple times it was created. What doesn't register is that over a week of checking the data, nothing shows up until today. That isn't consistent with the creation of the sub categories. Yes, under "Other: Authorized Member Financed Activities" We all know what I am talking about so I don't want to retype that every time.

The other item that shows up 7 times is not an issue where others added the sub. That category was added to MLS in August last year but never used. When Cubs came in, that account disappeared until today. Not Friday, or Wednesday last week, today...7 times...after an absence of 5 months. The other people who are in the finance area of MLS don't add anything to that account without me - because of the specific items that can only go in there. There is no way that that Sub account was added multiple times.

It would be much easier if support were open at hours I could take the time to call this in, but without taking time off work, I am unable to do that and was hoping they did any monitoring of this anyway. Perhaps, that is not the case. Thanks for the help, but these relationships to the tables are messed up.

Using the same sub account names would cause some errors, but the rationalization of how the items are being placed into those tables really don't have an explanation. This needs to be a discussion with the DB programmers, and perhaps not just the support personnel. How confident are you that the word would get to the right people, given a phone call to support can be made.

Thanks for the help.

[aebrown]

It would be much easier if support were open at hours I could take the time to call this in, but without taking time off work, I am unable to do that

Local Unit Support has extended hours on Tuesdays and Wednesdays from 7:30am to 8:00pm MT. Most people can find a time on those days to call.

... and was hoping they did any monitoring of this anyway. Perhaps, that is not the case.

I wouldn't count on anyone monitoring tens of thousands of units. When there are widespread problems that have fixes in the code itself, a general patch is released. But for problems that are much more narrow or specific to a unit, the unit has to take responsibility to report the problem itself.

This needs to be a discussion with the DB programmers, and perhaps not just the support personnel. How confident are you that the word would get to the right people, given a phone call to support can be made.

Clerks don't have direct access to DB programmers, but that's not required. There are abundant examples reported on this forum, and I personally have experienced at least 10 over the years, where clerks work with LUS to report problems that require database fixes. In every case, the support people have coordinated the collection of the information and the transmission of the database, and the fix has been made. So I highly recommend that you work with the existing support system for this problem.

[donaldbrooksby]

Local Unit Support has extended hours on Tuesdays and Wednesdays from 7:30am to 8:00pm MT. Most people can find a time on those days to call.



I wouldn't count on anyone monitoring tens of thousands of units. When there are widespread problems that have fixes in the code itself, a general patch is released. But for problems that are much more narrow or specific to a unit, the unit has to take responsibility to report the problem itself.



Clerks don't have direct access to DB programmers, but that's not required. There are abundant examples reported on this forum, and I personally have experienced at least 10 over the years, where clerks work with LUS to report problems that require database fixes. In every case, the support people have coordinated the collection of the information and the transmission of the database, and the fix has been made. So I highly recommend that you work with the existing support system for this problem.

Never mind, you aren't understanding the issue.

My work conditions don't allow for the free time to sit at the church computer during any of the times of operations that support offers. I email, I get first line support that asks, "Have you turned off your computer and rebooted first?", so I turn to a forum. It is evident that support is not the case, just discussions.

Monitoring:
That is not what I was saying. There are not tens-of-thousands of discussion topics in this forum. Is there not anyone of the programmers looking for the discussions on the parts of the programs they are directly effected with? I know Project managers monitor these, why is there no word getting to the correct people?

Programming:
That is not what I said. Clerks don't need direct access to the DB programmers. Not even close. Please re-read what you commented on above.

I need "real support" not fluff. I'm not monitoring this any more. It is wasting the time I don't have anyway. It is hard pressed to see where there is a Database issue and a programming issue that there is not one person who can give more to the issue than arguing every point within a statement of the issues seen. I am reporting a problem, I really don't care what is done with it. If there is a problem and nobody seeks to see what the problems are, then that is not my problem. I'll deal with the multiple accounts and when audited, the auditors will already know of the problem and they will have to deal with it, not me. If CUBS is going to continue this way, then the Church Finance department will have to be the driving force for change, not me and not any other position in the church it seems. You may have the time to banter on these forums Alan, I don't.
Bye.

[aebrown]

Never mind, you aren't understanding the issue.

I apologize for any misunderstanding. I was sincerely trying to understand, but I guess I have failed.

My work conditions don't allow for the free time to sit at the church computer during any of the times of operations that support offers. I email, I get first line support that asks, "Have you turned off your computer and rebooted first?", so I turn to a forum. It is evident that support is not the case, just discussions.

I'm sorry if it wasn't clear, but this is simply a community forum. We are clerks and others who try to help. Some people perceive this as helpful, others don't. But we certainly don't have access to the MLS developers or other resources that Local Unit Support has.

As for the time frame, I know it can be frustrating that the available times are limited. Is there someone else that can work with Local Unit Support on this issue? Perhaps another one of the clerks in your ward, or the stake financial clerk?

Monitoring:
That is not what I was saying. There are not tens-of-thousands of discussion topics in this forum. Is there not anyone of the programmers looking for the discussions on the parts of the programs they are directly effected with? I know Project managers monitor these, why is there no word getting to the correct people?

I misunderstood your use of the word "this" in your question about monitoring; my apologies. I don't know to what extent support, development, or project personnel monitor these forums. I'm pretty sure they don't have the time to monitor every one of the several thousand posts on the MLS forum alone. The official channel to get the word to the correct people is Local Unit Support, but it sounds like you have your frustrations with them.

Programming:
That is not what I said. Clerks don't need direct access to the DB programmers. Not even close. Please re-read what you commented on above.

I did reread it, and it's still not clear to me. Sorry.

I need "real support" not fluff. I'm not monitoring this any more. It is wasting the time I don't have anyway. It is hard pressed to see where there is a Database issue and a programming issue that there is not one person who can give more to the issue than arguing every point within a statement of the issues seen.

I apologize if it was appearing that I was arguing. I was simply trying to understand and to provide suggestions where I could.

You may have the time to banter on these forums Alan, I don't.

I'm sorry you saw it as bantering. I would not have wasted my time if I didn't think my comments might be helpful. I'm sorry you didn't find them helpful.

Bye.

It's a pity you couldn't get some closure on this thorny issue, but I certainly understand that you don't have unlimited time. I wish you well.