Account Reconcillations (RCM) Excluding an Import from Actuals
Hi All, I am currently setting up account reconcillations manager (RCM) and import both YTD GL data and Periodic Flow data in the actual scenario. I want to bring in just the YTD GL data into RCM, but it's bringing in both data sets. How can I exclude the Import Flow Data? I know that I can filter on the workflow profile "Import Flow Data" in the Account Rec inventory and delete them, but I'd rather the flow data just not come into RCM in the first place. Thanks for the help!
GetBaseMembers: How can I perform a getmembers on an entity as if it were in a cube view?
Hi Everyone. I wanted to see if there is a way to obtain the entities that are under another one but with a filter, like the following: E#|!PerformPnL_Entity!|.TreeDescendantsInclusive.Where(Text1 StartsWith M_ and (HasChildren = True)) I want to do this in a BR, but I am not sure exactly how to do it or if it is possible, since GetBaseMembers brings all of them and I would like to filter it first so that there are not too many entities to verify. I would appreciate it if you could help me with this question.
Average 12 months Account formulas
Hi everyone, I suspect that this is fairly simple, but I haven't been able to find a solution as yet. I need to add formulas for Debtor Days, Creditor Days, and Inventory Days, all of which use 12-month averages in the calculation. The also all use the number of days in the month. Does anyone have an example of the syntax needed to include both of these? Thanks
Help Needed with Confirmation Rule to Validate Annotations for Thresholds
Hello OS Community. I'm working on a confirmation rule that is supposed to check for the presence of annotations when thresholds are defined. The intended behavior is: If thresholds are present, but no annotation/comment is provided, the rule should fail validation. However, the logic isn't working as expected. Even when no comment is given, the rule still passes and acts as if a comment is provided. Here’s what I need help with Ensuring that the rule correctly identifies missing comments and fails as intended. Identifying what might be wrong in my current logic it seems to incorrectly detect comments even when none exist. Any insights or examples of similar logic would be much appreciated!
