Re: [Ledger-smb-users] Some issues.

Den 13. juli 2013 09:35, skrev Erik Huelsmann: > On Jul 11, 2013 10:12 PM, "Arne Hanssen" > wrote: > [...] > > 2. Response time is quite slow. I substituted my old server (Pentium > > II, 333 MHz) only recently with an 2,8 GHz and 1,5 GB RAM, but > > typically, it tak

Re: [Ledger-smb-users] Some issues.

> > 2. Response time is quite slow. I substituted my old server (Pentium > > > II, 333 MHz) only recently with an 2,8 GHz and 1,5 GB RAM, but > > > typically, it takes 6-8 seconds to most screens to show up after I > have > > > clicked on my selection. > > > > That's really way too slow. I ha

Re: [Ledger-smb-users] New User Anomalies

> For example 1000 Current Assets lists only the checking account debit. The AR debit > appears in the Capital Assets debit heading. 1820 Office equipment > appears under 3300 Share Capital. and so on. I have been digging around and here is what I've found. in every case, where an amount is

Re: [Ledger-smb-users] New User Anomalies

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:29 PM, Bill Ott wrote: > > For example 1000 Current Assets lists only the checking account debit. > The AR debit > > appears in the Capital Assets debit heading. 1820 Office equipment > > appears under 3300 Share Capital. and so on. > > I have been digging around and

Re: [Ledger-smb-users] New User Anomalies

Erik, I looked the the "chart" view. It only lists the account and the account_headings and all of the id's. No linking was apparent. There is no monetary data shown in the view, as there is when looking at reports->COA from the web interface. If the intent of the report is to show monetary i

Re: [Ledger-smb-users] New User Anomalies

Hi Bill, On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Bill Ott wrote: > Erik, I looked the the "chart" view. It only lists the account and the > account_headings and all of the id's. No linking was apparent. There is no > monetary data shown in the view, as there is when looking at reports->COA > from the

Re: [Ledger-smb-users] New User Anomalies

Erik, I agree with your root cause. Your solution may be the right one, given the circumstances, although without looking at the actual join, i would have thought that the inner join with the additional "account type" restriction would have worked. I can tell you I was bothered by the fact tha