Bug - The system shipped the goods but did not remove them from the reserve as a result, the balances are not correct

[quote] Of course, I can remove the binding and perhaps the problem will be solved (I don’t feel sorry for 2 seconds of time), it is important for me that the system does not fail in this way [/quote] well, delete it and save your time [quote] 1. Why did it happen (it’s not at all a logical thing to come out right there, since the write-off action from the warehouse removes the reserve and this action took place clearly later than the double transition to the stage was paid)? [/quote] I cannot know what and how your employee did in the past tense. [quote] 2. Can you guarantee that the system will not make similar mistakes in the future? [/quote] I have no obligation in this situation to guarantee you anything [quote] 3. Can you answer what the employees did wrong (to avoid such mistakes)? [/quote] if you want someone to spend time and analyze what your employees might have been doing "wrong" - order the services of a personal manager (paid technical support) and agree on who should do what and what. [quote] 4. Can you fix the error (if it's only to remove the binding, then do it and unsubscribe here)? [/quote] if you provide a step by step description of how to repeat it in 100% of cases [quote] 5. How can I find similar tasks with similar errors in the system (since I am sure that there are errors in old orders and this is already an accounting violation and now we need to revise)? [/quote] probably check all reserves in balances

Please tell me why all your answers somehow transfer all the blame for what happened to the employee? From your answers it turns out that the employee is somehow wrong and does something wrong, and OneBox products are perfect, and to solve the problem you need to hire a project manager (Sherlock Holmes) Please do not shift the blame on the employee, the employee did everything as usual and did nothing out of the box, but give a useful answer that will help solve the problem and the problem will not happen again in the future

There is no indication in my answer that the product is perfect and your employees are not working properly. If you perceived my answer somehow differently, and not as it was formulated, this is the problem of your perception. If you look more closely, my answer states that we can resolve the likely error if you point out how it can be replicated. And I do not refuse my words - if you provide a description of how to repeat the error, and if it is really a mistake (there is no error in the manager's actions), we will fix it. Now I do not see a step-by-step description either in the description or in your last comment. I see only a description of the situation in which you (apparently like any other manager) point out the correctness of your employee’s actions (which we do not deny or confirm), but indicate that the error is on the OneBox side without any argument (in particular, the step-by-step a description of the actions you perform, after which an erroneous situation occurs). And in your manner of communication, I can also ask you not to shift all your problems to OneBox if you cannot specifically indicate how to reproduce this or that error with the correct user actions. I also want to draw your attention to the fact that the forum does not imply that its participants, only at your direction, spend their time to understand what and how you are doing if you are not interested in contributing. If you want to get a specific answer, formulate a specific question, and if you want to get a solution to an error, justify its presence. After all, on the part of other forum participants - they have the right to ask questions and demand some additional description from you - you demand some kind of decision from them.

Ok, specific question: 1. Why the system behaves unnaturally (that is, if there were scales in abstraction, they showed 0 kilograms, we put a box on them and the scales began to show 100 grams, removed the box, they continue to show 100 grams), that is, what I initially described and showed this is something that cannot be repeated in normal mode, that is, such things, even if you want to somehow repeat it, it will be quite difficult, but the system did it under normal conditions (you can track all the actions of an employee in history), then there was a product in the orders, there were 8 pieces on the balance, then we go to the reserve in the reserve there is 1 piece, the balance is 8 - 1 = 7, then we write off the goods (the write-off action should automatically remove the reserve, we do not control this), but here is the system writes off the goods, but for some reason leaves a reserve, that is, there were 8 pieces, 1 piece was written off. and still hangs in reserve 1 pc. and the remainder comes out 6, although it should be 7, and how can this perversion be repeated, I don’t understand? 2. In the description of the task, I gave a link to the task (in which they are silent, stubbornly silent) and put forward the theory that the problem may be related, that is, it went to the stage at which the reserve twice, that is, it made 2 reserves, and at the write-off stage it was simply removed one reserve, and left one, as a result, 1 reserve was left, it was a theory, in that task the developer came to the decision "the employee obviously did some kind of game with page updates and poking all the buttons in a row" why the employees are being blamed and no answer is given " what the user should not do so that there are no such problems, that is, how the system works is kept “secret”, but the employee is to blame for what but something is not pressing? 3. Why is there no answer in that problem?

[quote] 1. Why the system behaves unnaturally (that is, if there were scales in abstraction, they showed 0 kilograms, we put a box on them and the scales began to show 100 grams, removed the box, they continue to show 100 grams), that is, what I initially described and showed this is something that cannot be repeated in normal mode, that is, such things, even if you want to somehow repeat it, it will be quite difficult, but the system did it under normal conditions (you can track all the actions of an employee in history), then there was a product in the orders, there were 8 pieces on the balance, then we go to the reserve in the reserve there is 1 piece, the balance is 8 - 1 = 7, then we write off the goods (the write-off action should automatically remove the reserve, we do not control this), but here is the system writes off the goods, but for some reason leaves a reserve, that is, there were 8 pieces, 1 piece was written off. and still hangs in reserve 1 pc. and the remainder comes out 6, although it should be 7, and how can this perversion be repeated, I don’t understand? [/quote] The fact that it is impossible to repeat in normal mode means that some specific actions that you do not know about lead to this. After all, if they knew, they could repeat it. If you don't know what and how you did it, I can't even know. [quote] 2. In the description of the task, I gave a link to the task (in which they are silent, stubbornly silent) and put forward the theory that the problem may be related, that is, it went to the stage at which the reserve twice, that is, it made 2 reserves, and at the write-off stage it was simply removed one reserve, and left one, as a result, 1 reserve was left, it was a theory, in that task the developer came to the decision "the employee obviously did some kind of game with page updates and poking all the buttons in a row" why the employees are being blamed and no answer is given " what the user should not do so that there are no such problems, that is, how the system works is kept “secret”, but the employee is to blame for what but something is not pressing? 3. Why is there no answer in that problem? [/quote] You can ask in the specified task. I did not communicate with you there.

[quote] Tyndyk Maxim Vadimovich Administrator wrote: The fact that it is impossible to repeat in normal mode means that some specific actions that you do not know about lead to this. After all, if they knew, they could repeat it. If you don't know what and how you did it, I can't even know. [/quote] If you (as a developer) give such answers, then all customers will run away from you, this is just the pinnacle of irresponsibility for the product and the operation of the system! Let's go in order then 1. Do you think the problem described in this task is related to this task https://crm-onebox.com/ru/support/business-processes/4754-povtorenie-problemi-perehoda-v-odin-i-tot-zhe- status-2-raza/ ? 2. Can you help solve the problem of that task? 3. According to the logic of the action "Ship (write off) the goods", the system removes the reserve before shipment if it was, in this example the system did not remove the reserve, although it was written off, that is, there is a bottleneck between the removal of the reserve and the write-off and no one in this place can influence on systems, since it all happens within the framework of one action, so I think that there is a flaw / bug in this place, do you agree or not? 4. Can the system now reserve one product (with the same quantity in the process) 2 pieces in the reserve within one process?

[quote] If you (as a developer) give such answers, then all customers will run away from you, this is just the pinnacle of irresponsibility for the product and the operation of the system! [/quote] This is your opinion - you have the right to express it. [quote] 1. Do you think the problem described in this task is related to this task /en/support/business-processes/4754-povtorenie-problemi-pe... ? [/quote] Everything, to some extent, explicitly or not, can be connected. I see no point in expressing my opinion on other topics in which I do not take part. [quote] 2. Can you help solve the problem of that task? [/quote] I have already answered you several times - if you provide a sequence of correct actions that lead to an obvious error - we will provide a solution. [quote] 3. According to the logic of the action "Ship (write off) the goods", the system removes the reserve before shipment if it was, in this example the system did not remove the reserve, although it was written off, that is, there is a bottleneck between the removal of the reserve and the write-off and no one in this place can influence on systems, since it all happens within the framework of one action, so I think that there is a flaw / bug in this place, do you agree or not? [/quote] You are free to count however you like. And I have the right to disagree with your "assumptions" if you do not provide me with a specific reasoning for the error (in this case, the sequence of correct actions). [quote] 4. Can the system now reserve one product (with the same quantity in the process) 2 pieces in the reserve within one process? [/quote] You can check it yourself on your system.

You reduce everything to absurdity, it's just some kind of circus Everything was done as usual, no "illegal actions" were done You, in turn, can see the history of user actions I understand that dealing with system bugs on user boxes that are not on the cloud is, to put it mildly, not a priority task, but this is your investment in product authority, although you probably don’t need it with the current scheme. If we abstract it, then it turns out that I (some ordinary employee of the ministry) came to you as a doctor and said that the patient recently died of an incomprehensible illness, and I ask you how you can avoid such cases, you tell me "if you provide a sequence of correct actions that lead to apparent death - I will provide a solution", that is, some kind of absurdity, such as some kind of abnormal failure occurred, moreover, through no fault of ours, the system behaved incorrectly as a result, and now, in order for you to start examining the problem, I need to provide you a detailed procedure, in short, some kind of nonsense comes out, how can I provide it if they didn’t do anything non-standard, everything works as usual 99.9% everything works, and then there was a failure, I described the assumptions, but alas, it doesn’t suit you, well, OK. If you don’t want to decide, well, write right away, you are not the target audience and we will not waste time on boxed boxes or on problems that arise unsystematically What else do you need to provide so that you can analyze the problem (everything you could provide, now I can’t repeat this)?

[quote] I understand that dealing with system bugs on user boxes that are not on the cloud is, to put it mildly, not a priority task, but this is your investment in product authority, although you probably don’t need it with the current scheme. [/quote] Your right to think so. I pointed out several times above specific simple conditions under which I can help you - I can’t solve some kind of “error”, when you can’t reproduce it, you can’t. [quote] If we abstract it, then it turns out that I (some ordinary employee of the ministry) came to you as a doctor and said that the patient recently died of an incomprehensible illness, and I ask you how you can avoid such cases, you tell me "if you provide a sequence of correct actions that lead to apparent death - I will provide a solution", that is, some kind of absurdity, such as some kind of abnormal failure occurred, moreover, through no fault of ours, the system behaved incorrectly as a result, and now, in order for you to start examining the problem, I need to provide you a detailed procedure, in short, some kind of nonsense comes out, how can I provide it if they didn’t do anything non-standard, everything works as usual 99.9% everything works, and then there was a failure, I described the assumptions, but alas, it doesn’t suit you, well, OK. [/quote] If you have already spoken in a similar style, I will try to explain to you what is really happening in the same style. Such an appeal reminds me of a grandmother who lived quietly for herself - and then she suddenly leaned over and her back hurt. She unbent, immediately called the doctor and says "treat". Well, the doctor actually sees that there is no obvious illness - and begins to ask his grandmother "what did you do that caused pain?" - Grandmother says "nothing unusual, everything is as always - she bent down." After a request to repeat the same actions - it turns out that it does not hurt. But the grandmother persistently asks the doctor to treat her, it is not clear why - but so that this does not happen again. The way you compare an isolated case with an obvious death - I would also agree if, when performing certain actions, you had a critical error, after which you cannot do anything - we would immediately see such an error in the system and correct it. [quote] What else do you need to provide so that you can analyze the problem (everything you could provide, now I can’t repeat this)? [/quote] As before, I do not see in your comments a description of the sequence of actions that will lead to the above, in your opinion, "error". If you provide them, I will analyze what exactly is going wrong and correct in case of an error. Analyzing what is not there is a waste of time.

Analyze the history of actions on the order that I brought Then you will understand that there is a double transition to the status "Paid" Then you will understand that this is the source of the origin of the problem described in the current task (which I cannot repeat now, since they do not give me an answer in the task in which I wrote) Well, then put some kind of check in the goods write-off procedure that would remove the reserve for all goods, or put protection so that it would not make double reserves

[file]4287[/file]