Deletion of Document Lines Leaves Incorrect Usage Data References #4862

samra-singhammer · 2025-09-24T07:10:36Z

Summary

Fix incorrect usage data handling in usage-based contracts. Deleting invoice or credit memo lines currently leaves stale or unlinked usage data entries. The solution ensures related usage data is reset or removed properly while keeping posted-linked records intact.

Work Item(s)

Fixes AB#4856

samra-singhammer · 2025-09-24T07:14:01Z

@samra-singhammer please read the following Contributor License Agreement(CLA). If you agree with the CLA, please reply with the following information.
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree [company="{your company}"]
Options:

(default - no company specified) I have sole ownership of intellectual property rights to my Submissions and I am not making Submissions in the course of work for my employer.
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree
(when company given) I am making Submissions in the course of work for my employer (or my employer has intellectual property rights in my Submissions by contract or applicable law). I have permission from my employer to make Submissions and enter into this Agreement on behalf of my employer. By signing below, the defined term “You” includes me and my employer.
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree company="Microsoft"
Contributor License Agreement

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree [company="Singhammer IT Consulting AG"]

samra-singhammer · 2025-09-24T07:14:59Z

@samra-singhammer please read the following Contributor License Agreement(CLA). If you agree with the CLA, please reply with the following information.
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree [company="{your company}"]
Options:

(default - no company specified) I have sole ownership of intellectual property rights to my Submissions and I am not making Submissions in the course of work for my employer.
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree
(when company given) I am making Submissions in the course of work for my employer (or my employer has intellectual property rights in my Submissions by contract or applicable law). I have permission from my employer to make Submissions and enter into this Agreement on behalf of my employer. By signing below, the defined term “You” includes me and my employer.
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree company="Microsoft"
Contributor License Agreement

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree

miljance

The test TestBillingLineInUsageDataNoWhenBillingProposalIsCreated is failing.

miljance · 2025-09-25T14:58:04Z

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/App/Billing/Codeunits/BillingProposal.Codeunit.al

+        if UsageDataBilling.FindSet() then
+            repeat
+                UsageDataBilling."Billing Line Entry No." := BillingLine."Entry No.";
+                UsageDataBilling.Modify(false);
+            until UsageDataBilling.Next() = 0;


I would prefer to use ModifyAll() here instead of Looping.

miljance · 2025-09-25T15:02:09Z

...ubscription Billing/App/Usage Based Billing/Codeunits/UsageBasedContrSubscribers.Codeunit.al

+            exit;
+        if Rec.IsTemporary then
+            exit;
+        PurchaseHeader.Get(Rec."Document Type", Rec."Document No.");


There is a built in function named FilterDocumentWithLine in Usage Data Billing table. Can we use this one instead? I would like to avoid unintentionally breaking whatever might have been programmed at any other BC client.

miljance · 2025-09-25T15:02:43Z

...ubscription Billing/App/Usage Based Billing/Codeunits/UsageBasedContrSubscribers.Codeunit.al

+            exit;
+        if Rec.IsTemporary then
+            exit;
+        SalesHeader.Get(Rec."Document Type", Rec."Document No.");


For whatever reason there might be Sales Lines without existing Sales Header. I would thus prefer conditional Get.

miljance · 2025-09-25T15:08:03Z

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/App/Billing/Codeunits/BillingProposal.Codeunit.al

+        UsageDataBilling.FilterOnServiceCommitment(SubscriptionLine);
+        UsageDataBilling.SetRange("Document Type", "Usage Based Billing Doc. Type"::None);
+        UsageDataBilling.SetFilter("Charge Start Date", '<=%1', BillingLine."Billing from");
+        UsageDataBilling.SetFilter("Charge End Date", '>=%1', BillingLine."Billing to");


There is a function named SetUsageDataBillingFilters. Can we use this one? Or perhaps even IsUsageDataBillingFound? In this case this loop can convert to a two liner.

Filtering is completely different.

That is a good point. Why is the filtering different? Currently these filters are wrong, and code seems to do nothing because it cannot find any records where an end date is before the start date:

How is charge end date before charge start date?
The idea is that one Usage Data Billing can have multiple BIlling Lines. Let's say yearly Usage data will have 12 billing lines with different Billing To, and we need to "catch" them all. Let's discuss it if needed.

Oh, my fault. Sorry.

miljance · 2025-09-25T15:11:13Z

...ubscription Billing/App/Usage Based Billing/Codeunits/UsageBasedContrSubscribers.Codeunit.al

+        UsageDataBilling.FilterDocumentWithLine("Service Partner"::Vendor, UsageBasedDocTypeConv.ConvertPurchaseDocTypeToUsageBasedBillingDocType(Rec."Document Type"), Rec."Document No.", Rec."Line No.");
+        if UsageDataBilling.IsEmpty() then
+            exit;


There is a built in function named FilterDocumentWithLine in Usage Data Billing table. Can we use this one instead?

miljance · 2025-09-25T15:11:19Z

...ubscription Billing/App/Usage Based Billing/Codeunits/UsageBasedContrSubscribers.Codeunit.al

+        UsageDataBilling.FilterDocumentWithLine("Service Partner"::Customer, UsageBasedDocTypeConv.ConvertSalesDocTypeToUsageBasedBillingDocType(Rec."Document Type"), Rec."Document No.", Rec."Line No.");
+        if UsageDataBilling.IsEmpty() then
+            exit;


There is a built in function named FilterDocumentWithLine in Usage Data Billing table. Can we use this one instead? I would like to avoid unintentionally breaking whatever might have been programmed at any other BC client.

miljance · 2025-09-25T15:13:04Z

...ubscription Billing/App/Usage Based Billing/Codeunits/UsageBasedContrSubscribers.Codeunit.al

+    local procedure ClearUsageDataBillingDocumentValues(var UsageDataBilling: Record "Usage Data Billing")
+    begin
+        if UsageDataBilling.FindSet() then
+            repeat
+                UsageDataBilling.SaveDocumentValues(UsageDataBilling."Document Type"::None, '', 0, 0);
+            until UsageDataBilling.Next() = 0;
+    end;


The same code exist in the function RemoveDocumentValuesFromUsageDataBilling. I think the function RemoveDocumentValuesFromUsageDataBilling should also call the function ClearUsageDataBillingDocumentValues

miljance · 2025-09-25T15:14:47Z

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/Test/UBB/UsageBasedBillingTest.Codeunit.al

+
+    [HandlerFunctions('ExchangeRateSelectionModalPageHandler,CreateCustomerBillingDocumentPageHandler,MessageHandler')]
+    [Test]
+    procedure DeleteUsageDataBillingLineWhenRelatedSalesInvoiceLineIsDeleted()


The function name is misleading as the Scenario states that some fields in Usage Data Billing are cleared but the record is not deleted. I guess also that the Test should not check if there are not Usage Data Billings for the Invoice Line but if the Usage Data Billing has been cleared.

Scenario + test is updated.

Update of scenario and test is incorrect. This function does NOT delete the UsageDataBilling. It should only test clearing the "Billing Line Entry No.".

miljance · 2025-09-25T15:16:08Z

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/Test/UBB/UsageBasedBillingTest.Codeunit.al

+
+    [HandlerFunctions('ExchangeRateSelectionModalPageHandler,CreateVendorBillingDocumentPageHandler,MessageHandler')]
+    [Test]
+    procedure DeleteUsageDataBillingLineWhenRelatedPurchLineIsDeleted()


The function name is misleading as the Scenario states that some fields in Usage Data Billing are cleared but the record is not deleted. Also the name of function is missing the word "Invoice". I guess also that the Test should not check if there are not Usage Data Billings for the Invoice Line but if the Usage Data Billing has been cleared.

Scenario + test is updated.

Update of scenario and test is incorrect. This function does NOT delete the UsageDataBilling. It should only test clearing the "Billing Line Entry No.".

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/Test/UBB/UsageBasedBillingTest.Codeunit.al

miljance · 2025-09-29T15:16:41Z

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/App/Billing/Codeunits/BillingProposal.Codeunit.al

+        UsageDataBilling.FilterOnServiceCommitment(SubscriptionLine);
+        UsageDataBilling.SetRange("Document Type", "Usage Based Billing Doc. Type"::None);
+        UsageDataBilling.SetFilter("Charge Start Date", '<=%1', BillingLine."Billing from");
+        UsageDataBilling.SetFilter("Charge End Date", '>=%1', BillingLine."Billing to");


That is a good point. Why is the filtering different? Currently these filters are wrong, and code seems to do nothing because it cannot find any records where an end date is before the start date:

miljance · 2025-09-29T15:18:55Z

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/Test/UBB/UsageBasedBillingTest.Codeunit.al

+
+    [HandlerFunctions('ExchangeRateSelectionModalPageHandler,CreateCustomerBillingDocumentPageHandler,MessageHandler')]
+    [Test]
+    procedure DeleteUsageDataBillingLineWhenRelatedSalesInvoiceLineIsDeleted()


Update of scenario and test is incorrect. This function does NOT delete the UsageDataBilling. It should only test clearing the "Billing Line Entry No.".

miljance · 2025-09-29T15:19:04Z

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/Test/UBB/UsageBasedBillingTest.Codeunit.al

+
+    [HandlerFunctions('ExchangeRateSelectionModalPageHandler,CreateVendorBillingDocumentPageHandler,MessageHandler')]
+    [Test]
+    procedure DeleteUsageDataBillingLineWhenRelatedPurchLineIsDeleted()


Update of scenario and test is incorrect. This function does NOT delete the UsageDataBilling. It should only test clearing the "Billing Line Entry No.".

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/Test/UBB/UsageBasedBillingTest.Codeunit.al

miljance · 2025-10-06T14:06:19Z

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/App/Billing/Codeunits/BillingProposal.Codeunit.al

+        if UsageDataBilling.FindSet() then
+            repeat
+                // Check if usage data period overlaps with billing line period
+                if IsPeriodsOverlapping(UsageDataBilling."Charge Start Date", UsageDataBilling."Charge End Date",
+                                      BillingLine."Billing from", BillingLine."Billing to") then begin
+                    UsageDataBilling."Billing Line Entry No." := BillingLine."Entry No.";
+                    UsageDataBilling.Modify(false);
+                end;
+            until UsageDataBilling.Next() = 0;
+    end;
+
+    local procedure IsPeriodsOverlapping(UsageStartDate: Date; UsageEndDate: Date; BillingStartDate: Date; BillingEndDate: Date): Boolean
+    begin
+        exit((UsageStartDate <= BillingEndDate) and (UsageEndDate >= BillingStartDate));
+    end;
+


This part could still be aligned with the function that serve the purpose of checking if there are Usage Data Billing connected to a Billing Line. The function is called SetUsageDataBillingFilters in Subscription Lines. Otherwise, we introduce code redundancy that can be avoided. The proposed solution fixes an issue but deserves a bit of optimization. Also, it is better to use ModifyAll after filters have been set.

AndersLarsenMicrosoft

Please move ahead

AndersLarsenMicrosoft · 2025-10-08T13:39:32Z

Please remove 'CorrectPostedPurchInvoice'
AA0137 Variable 'CorrectPostedPurchInvoice' is unused in 'DeleteUsageDataBillingLineWhenRelatedPurchCrMemoLineIsDeleted'.

AndersLarsenMicrosoft · 2025-10-08T13:46:30Z

src/Apps/W1/Subscription Billing/Test/UBB/UsageBasedBillingTest.Codeunit.al

+    var
+        PurchCrMemoHeader: Record "Purchase Header";
+        PurchInvHeader: Record "Purch. Inv. Header";
+        CorrectPostedPurchInvoice: Codeunit "Correct Posted Purch. Invoice";


Please remove this one. It have become an error after moving to BCAPPS

Deletion of Document Lines Leaves Incorrect Usage Data References

5d7434a

samra-singhammer requested a review from a team as a code owner September 24, 2025 07:10

github-actions bot added the From Fork Pull request is coming from a fork label Sep 24, 2025

github-actions bot added the Linked Issue is linked to a Azure Boards work item label Sep 24, 2025

github-actions bot added this to the Version 28.0 milestone Sep 24, 2025

miljance suggested changes Sep 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

JesperSchulz added the Finance GitHub request for Finance area label Sep 26, 2025

Deletion of Document Lines Leaves Incorrect Usage Data References *2

c3a6838

samra-singhammer requested a review from miljance September 29, 2025 14:06

miljance suggested changes Sep 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

AndersLarsenMicrosoft assigned djukicmilica Oct 2, 2025

Deletion of Document Lines Leaves Incorrect Usage Data References *3

8a9b14d

samra-singhammer requested a review from miljance October 2, 2025 08:56

Deletion of Document Lines Leaves Incorrect Usage Data References *4

8dc8de1

djukicmilica previously approved these changes Oct 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

djukicmilica enabled auto-merge (squash) October 6, 2025 10:53

miljance suggested changes Oct 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

Deletion of Document Lines Leaves Incorrect Usage Data References *5

664a3d1

auto-merge was automatically disabled October 6, 2025 15:10
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access

samra-singhammer dismissed djukicmilica’s stale review via 664a3d1 October 6, 2025 15:10

miljance approved these changes Oct 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

JesperSchulz previously approved these changes Oct 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

JesperSchulz enabled auto-merge (squash) October 6, 2025 15:22

AndersLarsenMicrosoft previously approved these changes Oct 7, 2025

View reviewed changes

AndersLarsenMicrosoft reviewed Oct 8, 2025

View reviewed changes

Deletion of Document Lines Leaves Incorrect Usage Data References *6

b4de3b8

auto-merge was automatically disabled October 9, 2025 07:29
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access

samra-singhammer dismissed stale reviews from AndersLarsenMicrosoft and JesperSchulz via b4de3b8 October 9, 2025 07:29

djukicmilica enabled auto-merge (squash) October 9, 2025 09:14

djukicmilica approved these changes Oct 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

Deletion of Document Lines Leaves Incorrect Usage Data References #4862

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Deletion of Document Lines Leaves Incorrect Usage Data References #4862

Uh oh!

Conversation

samra-singhammer commented Sep 24, 2025 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

Work Item(s)

Uh oh!

samra-singhammer commented Sep 24, 2025

Uh oh!

samra-singhammer commented Sep 24, 2025

Uh oh!

miljance left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

samra-singhammer Sep 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AndersLarsenMicrosoft left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AndersLarsenMicrosoft commented Oct 8, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

samra-singhammer commented Sep 24, 2025 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

samra-singhammer Sep 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading