Hey all,
Is it generally considered safe to truncate and repopulate TR_BATCH_PERIOD? I'm not actually going to be changing the way the periods and quarters are structured, but the ids will change since I'm going farther back in time than what currently exists. Nothing should be expected to foreign-key on this id column, would it?
Nick,
You can insert the rows with the historical dates and not worry about the id values. Though, I do understand wanting to keep things sequential... so, the only 'likely' gotcha with changing the ids would be if you are doing something with T_GL_POSTING_FTP. I'd double check with support and/or make a backup of the table, but assuming there aren't historical period ids in use (your posting/custom reports), then truncating the table and repopulating so that the 'start' is further in the past - is fine. I've done this before. Also, build this table out for years... as it is required for things like Season Overview and there's no harm in having 10000 rows. --ps, most of the standard procedures which use this table look at the dates, not the ids.
JD Short said:most of the standard procedures which use this table look at the dates, not the ids.
Makes sense, e.g. unlikely that any two orgs would have the same fyear, start date, etc., at id = 1.