I need to sort my cash entries from oldest to newest either by date or reference number. The default view shows balance like below:
but when any change is done to the sorting the balance column disappears. see below
Yes, because it is a running balance and uses the original entry sequence for which it will make sense. Please explain how the balance of your second screenshot would progress.
True, my client wants to review their records from oldest to newest contrary to current view ( kinda like bank reconciliation).
It should look like this its technically the same as our default view but in reverse order:
So just you your spreadsheet’s filter. That is the reason why copy to clipboard exists to allow further actions on the underlying data.
I cannot do that because manager does not paste balance column in the spreadsheet. Plus, for records on the same date the excel filter and sort my have some randomness that affects the running total (that is why I resorted to using a formula instead).
It does not have to as you can yourself put a balance calculation formula in the spreadsheet.
I would like to know the basis of said claim? If you have anything against this request kindly put it forward. I’m simply requesting a basic feature that makes using the program easier for all of us.
I already explained that when sorting the data the report will not be able to show the balances.
@BawarYassin, the reason this is not practical has been explained many times on the forum. Your client’s inability to understand is not justification for making a baseless change to the program.
@eko I fail to see the extra steps you are talking about if we are keeping the balance column in a reverse sorting. And printing not relevant to my request here nor is affecting the matter.
@Tut, Quoting my client here “Why does the layout brakes and removes the balance column when I sort from oldest to newest?”.
You might see this current behavior as an innovation in Manager but my client sees it as a bug and I’m siding with my client here.
If we already have the balance column then it is not a baseless change. It is rather an improvement to keep the balance column while reverse sorting. Thus eliminating the need of using a spreadsheet as well.
Correct my mistake.
The balance column shows only in the default report because it’s built in formula allows to do so, hence it being greyed out. It disappears as soon as you change the order because the fixed formula can not cope with this. The solution for your client is given, i.e. copy to clipboard and paste into a spreadsheet and filter how you like it and then create a balance column with a formula that makes sense.
The layout is not broken. When the default display order is on screen, the program can calculate a running balance. This is not a variable that is stored, but is calculated on the fly based on the order of transactions extracted from the database. Whenever that default order is disrupted, whether by a search or a sort (on any column, not just on date), the calculation cannot be performed. In many circumstances, the running balance would have no meaning. Obviously, you did not look for other discussions about this on the forum, or you would have encountered this explanation.
No, I do not. It has been like that from the beginning. You are the one seeking an innovation on behalf of your client, who apparently does not understand the ramifications.
As I explained above, you do not “have the balance column.” The display code calculates figures in the balance column, but only under the specified situation.
Quoting the developer:
More explicitly, something is not a bug when it functions as designed, as is the case here. The developer did not intend or expect you to see a running balance once the default list order on which the calculation is based is changed.
You and your client are free to do whatever you wish with the data by copying it to a spreadsheet, whether or not there is any accounting basis for doing so. But changing the sort order does not mean a running balance has rational meaning any longer. Your client’s desire to have a meaningless column demonstrates why the developer did not include running balances after searches or sorts.
If that is the case then I can see it being difficult for the developer to implement. By the way we have balance statements for customers and suppliers that are by default listed from earliest to oldest with a running balance very rational and meaningful. Anyways I don’t think we need to continue this back and forth discussion anymore. I convinced my client to my client to use date columns in
Bank Account Summary Reports to achieve what the want. This topic can be closed.