Hi All, new to Manger and trying the batch feature to import transactions, but seems its changing “Payee”
Top screenshot show “Lowes” as one of the payee, however, in batch, payee show “Other”. How do I fix this?
In the very first, you have to batch/single create customer/supplier in the manager
then, include GUID in excel sheet in the specific customer/supplier column
Thanks for the response Mahfuzur. This did not work for me, but when I used the name in “contact” it took it as Payee which was interesting.
But this whole thing is crazy, if I have to go in and add UUID’s for accounts/payee, then whats the point of using batch process. This should be seamless to the users, the software should link to UUIds automatically. That is the function of software, to minimize entries from users.
And just how do you propose the software do that? What happens when there are multiple customers with the identical name, as often occurs? Or what if a bank statement includes only a surname? Or an abbreviated name? And what if the bank’s software reverses given names and surnames, since there are not standards that are followed everywhere? How would the software uniquely identify them? That is the entire point of having UUIDs.
2 Likes
very easy I think,
- create a New payment for example. then
Batch Update - Paste to Excel and input and arrange your data as batch update. then, Delete last column “Key”
- import all of them to software as Batch create.
I support your questions. and I want to add some thinking, how about add username feature for customer,supplier,employees,capital account in separate business. in this way, Manager can obsolete GUID from customer,supplier,employees,capital.
The hard part is a UUID is maintained unique by the system.
User entered labels are unique only because users happen to always enter unique labels in that particular feild. And while that makes sense for some work flows it will not make sense for other users work flows, such as where a second field is used to distinguish to similar entries.
A group of user loosing batch update just because they have a different work flow is probably not optimal.
1 Like
Hi Tut,
I totally agree that there can be non-unique names, in that case software can skip them (or default it), like it puts a transaction in suspense when it does not find a rule. Or you can enforce a unique names. All I am saying is, It’s hard for users to remember UUIds, they have to go to corresponding screens to get it, but for names you don’t have to reference any screens, you just know.
And just so you know, your batch feature is really awesome!! It’s just my perspective as a user to make it more user friendly.
Sure it is and I think that @Lubos is thinking about making it more user friendly. However, issue remains. The database must use unique identifiers to link it all. So from a programming perspective it will be extremely difficult to come up with something that ignores this need. Every record is a compilation of several linked by unique IDs such as UUID. This is common for every database application as it allows to connect data uniquely. So although it may be “cumbersome” many use the UUIDs and got used to use Excel VLookup to match for batch operations. I work with other applications as well that allow for Batch processing but from experience and despite the need for UUIDs Manager is far more intuitive and powerful. So I would just advise to familiarze yourself with how to most efffectively you can use it inclusive of UUIDs.
1 Like
I agree, batch processing is definitely powerful.