Validation rule of error to a value greater than $999,999,999,999.99.

Similar Questions

• Validation of numeric field to a value greater than zero

  Hello
  
  I am new to the technology of the ADF. I have a text field for which I have to do the validation as it must be digital and there should be greater than zero if it is not null. Please help me on how to do this as part of the ADF. Technology using 11.1 ADF and JSF

  Hello

  This should help: http://jdevadf.oracle.com/adf-richclient-demo/docs/tagdoc/af_validateLongRange.html

• Read byte with a value up to 127 lire byte with an ASCII value greater than 7F (127 dec)

  Hello

  I have to read a byte with a value greater than 127, Labview turn 27.

  In help I saw that Labview provides a description of ASCII that pour values ranging up to ' 127.

  What do I need to do?

  LabVIEW 6.1

  Windows XP

  Hello

  I want to read a byte with a maximum value of 127, but Labiew reurn arround 27 value

  How do I do?

  

  Rigid wrote:

  Thanks for your help. I'm not changing lyke I understand (my English is poor quiet...)

  I have another program that communicate with the instrument. I know byte (6) must be greater than 18 (greater than 7F actually).

  But with Labview, I'm only 18.

  While it might be higher than 18 x, an I8 is signed, and therefore it cannot be greater than x7F - it has a range of-128 to 127. A U8 is not signed, and it's why he has a range from 0 to xFF. However, x 18 is the same if you treat as signed or not signed. I don't see how LabVIEW can read a wrong value on the serial port. Are you sure you're looking at the correct byte? Your code shows that you split the chain twice. Are you sure that you do this properly?

  Given that you use on Windows you can recheck the chain received using PortMon. Allows you to see what is actually received by the driver for the serial port on Windows.

  P.S. I actually meant the whole byte function.

• [10g] way to find the least value greater than a value?

  I have a simple (I think) question...
  
  Part 1:
  Is there a way to determine the least value among a set of values, which is greater than 0?
  
  A few examples:

  Set of values:
  {0,1,2,3}
  Return value:
  1
  
  Set of values:
  {0,5,10,20,100}
  Return value:
  5
  
  Set of values:
  {1,4,9,11}
  Return value:
  1

  Part 2:
  Same thing, but greater than some given value, 0 is not necessary.
  

  Set of values:
  {0,1,2,3}
  Parameter value: 
  2
  Return value:
  3
  
  Set of values:
  {0,5,10,20,100}
  Parameter value: 
  2
  Return value:
  5
  
  Set of values:
  {1,4,9,11}
  Parameter value: 
  2
  Return value:
  4

  In particular, I'm looking for an effective way to achieve this. I think I can do it with a set of CASE statements, but it becomes really complex values compare more than you.
  
  My first thought was to use the function LESS, but which does not allow me a way to use a parameter.
  
  Any suggestions?

  Hello

  Thanks for posting the sample data.
  I know that it takes hard work to do, but it's really help people who want to help you. Sometimes, it can help you, too, giving you new perspectives on what the problem really is. As often do not, when I am confused by something and need help, I discovered an answer while assembling a test script and write a description of the problem.

  You can use the function LESS, with CASE expressions as arguments, to do what you want:

  SELECT     ord_nbr
  ,     seq_nbr
  ,     time_spent /
       CASE
            WHEN     comp_qty > plan_qty
            THEN     LEAST ( CASE  WHEN ord_qty - scrap_qty > 0 THEN ord_qty - scrap_qty ELSE 1E99 END
                       , CASE  WHEN plan_qty              > 0 THEN plan_qty           ELSE 1E99 END
                       , CASE  WHEN comp_qty            > 0 THEN comp_qty         ELSE 1E99 END
                       )
       END     AS unit_time
  FROM     ord_detail
  ;
  

  This means that your actual data are never as large as 1E99, and at least one of the three expressions will be greater than 0.
  If or any of these assumptions are false, I'm sure we can find a solution, but it will probably be even messier.

  It should work in Oracle 8.1.

• Simultaneous request fails even if I set a value greater than max degrees...

  Hello
  I get the following in a concurrent request error message...
  "This request has completed with an error and produces the following execution message:
  ORA-01631: extended max (600) reached in the APPLSYS table. WF_LOCAL_ROLES_STAGE ".
  
  Then I issued the command: alter table applsys.wf_local_roles_stage storage (maxextents 650)
  
  and gets it to sql statement...
  I confirm this via the sql stmt:
  Select max_extents from all_tables where table_name = 'WF_LOCAL_ROLES_STAGE '.
  
  Subsequently, I re - submit the same application of conc... and it turns bad again the error message that I wrote above...
  "This request has completed with an error and produces the following execution message:
  ORA-01631: extended max (600) reached in the APPLSYS table. WF_LOCAL_ROLES_STAGE ".
  
  When I run the command: select max_extents from all_tables where table_name = 'WF_LOCAL_ROLES_STAGE '.
  the result is-> 600 (the value has been restored to the former)...
  
  What may be the cause...?
  
  Note: I use EBS 11.5.10, DB 10.2.0.4
  Also, I tried maxextents on greater value value again to an unlimited number... and although the command gets (alter table applsys.wf_local_roles_stage (maxextents xxxx) storage) demand of the conc. fails due to max (600) met in the APPLSYS table extensions. WF_LOCAL_ROLES_STAGE.
  
  Thank you
  SIM

  SIM,

  Please see the following document.

  Note: 397283.1 - simultaneous use synchronize Wf Local Tables errors with ORA-01631
  https://metalink2.Oracle.com/MetaLink/PLSQL/ml2_documents.showDocument?p_database_id=not&P_ID=397283.1

  Kind regards
  Hussein

• ODI 12 C | Error ORA-01438: value larger than the precision specified for the column

  I keep getting this error when trying to load an XML file exchange rates in a table of data warehouse. I defined the type of XML data model to NUMBER (18,15), identical to the target and it works for rates with an accuracy of 1, then when the transformed with an accuracy of 4 it generates this error. This was really frustrating... There must be somewhere a temporary table created with precision different, right? Any help with this would be appreciated.

  The example data:

  Result of currency rates

  1.4454325324 COL AUD

  1.3943435826 CAD PASS

  8.9824929424 COL CNY

  4326.4323456123 COP FAIL

  You seem to be confused with the terminology you use here. The precision is the total number of digits allowed in your number in your definition, i.e. NUMBER (18,15), precision 18, which means that you can have up to 18 digits in your number. However, you have also defined a scale value of 15 that denotes the amount of numbers that are sitting to the right of the decimal point. This means that you have only allowed for the 3 digits to sit to the left of the decimal point that is precision - scale (18-15). That's why you get the error when you try and load the COP currency that your definition of data type does not support having more than 3 digits left of the decimal separator.

• OR 9401 at starting out a value greater than 4 000 000 000

  I use DAQ Assistant to read linear a NI 9401 moving in a cDAQ 9178 chassis.  On a few occasions, when I load the VI and start logging from the front position there is no movement, the NI 9401 generates the values as high as 4,294,967,241.  He slowly counts down and then when there's actual movement, the 9401starts OR count the position of 0.  On other occasions, it starts normally from a position of 0.  No one knows what means this high value and why it's output?

  johnsold wrote:

  A number like who are close the possible extreme values for an I32. I suspect that your negative movement caused a reversal of meter that has been interpreted as a maximum or near maximum negative number.

  You are actually at the limit of 32 (32-bit unsigned integer).  If the movement back would result in turnover between 0 and 4294967295 and slowly down while moving backward.

• formatting time to a value greater than 23:59

  Hi all
  I have the following problem:
  in my database I'm ranger schedules of the buses in time stamp formats. If we assume, journey begins to a stop from the station at 23:59 and ends the next day at 00 h 10, this value has the day successive.
  So far so good.
  Now I want to export this table in a specific format, where only the hours, the minutes and the seconds are relevant. Is it now a way to tell oracle to store this value instead of 00:10 24:10?
  
  Thanks a lot for your help
  
  Markus
  
  Published by: markusin on November 26, 2009 05:23

  markusin wrote:
  Thanks a lot for your answer. the only problem always arises when the trip ends at 01:00 or later, it would not be replaced. But, I can solve this problem by myself now.

  No problem:

  select  to_char(start_dt,'dd-mm-yyyy hh24:mi') start_dt,
          to_char(end_dt,'dd-mm-yyyy hh24:mi') end_dt,
          to_char(start_dt,'hh24:mi') start_hhmi,
          case
            when trunc(end_dt) > trunc(start_dt) then to_char(24 + to_char(end_dt,'hh24'),'FM00') || to_char(end_dt,':mi')
            else to_char(end_dt,'hh24:mi')
          end end_hhmi
    from (
          select trunc(sysdate) - 1/24/60 start_dt,trunc(sysdate) + 70/24/60 end_dt from dual union all
          select trunc(sysdate) + 1/24/60  start_dt,trunc(sysdate) + 10/24/60 end_dt from dual
         )
  /
  
  START_DT         END_DT               START_HHMI END_HHMI
  ---------------- -------------------- ---------- ----------
  25-11-2009 23:59 26-11-2009 01:10     23:59      25:10
  26-11-2009 00:01 26-11-2009 00:10     00:01      00:10
  
  SQL> 
  

  SY.

• Retrieve the index of a table with a value greater than zero

  How is it possible to extract the indices of the elements above zero in a 2D array?

  Example:

  Table:

  0 12 11 33 0

  1 0 0 0 0

  2 99 0 9 0

  Need to get 12,11,33 table indexes and so on...

  Nghtcrwlr,

  Attached is the first thing that comes to mind.

  Dan

• ORA-01438: value larger than the precision specified for this column?

  Hi guys:
  
  I'm stuck in this error when I try to do an insert into a table. My Source has 581K records, but only this code and the values described below gives me a headache.
  
  Here's the DDL for the source and the target.
  
  CREATE TABLE WRK. VL_FREED
  ('CODE' VARCHAR2 (9))
  NUMBER (15.7) "VL_FREED".
  )
  
  CREATE TABLE WRK. VL_RENEG
  ('CODE' VARCHAR2 (9))
  NUMBER (15.7) "VL_RENEG".
  )
  
  CREATE TABLE WRK. WRK_XPTO
  ('CODE' VARCHAR2 (9))
  NUMBER (15,10) "VL_XPTO".
  )
  
  ------------------------------------------------
  The values for the VL_FREED AND VL_RENEG tables:
  
  
  CODE = 458330728 (same on both)
  VL_FREED = 191245.3000000
  VL_RENEG = 74095.3800000
  
  -------------------------------------------------
  
  When I try to run this insert:
  
  INSERT INTO WRK. WRK_XPTO
  (
  CODE,
  VL_XPTO
  )
  Select
  T1. CODE,
  T1. VL_FREED - T2. VL_RENEG
  of WRK. VL_FREED T1, WRK. VL_RENEG T2
  WHERE
  (T1. CD_CODE = T2. CODE);
  
  I got the error:
  ORA-01438: value larger than the precision specified for the column
  
  But how can this be? The result of 191245.3000000 - 74095.3800000 is not greater than a number (15,10).
  
  Can someone help me on this?

  Number (15,10) means 15 total digits, 10 of which are to the right of the decimal separator, leaving only 5 on the left.

  190 000 - 75 000 = 115 000 (6 digits).

• Read/write file binary change greater than 128 bytes.

  Hi all, maybe a strange question, but I'm scratching my head on this one. There is undocumented behavior in the function of read/write binary file, where U8 a value greater than 128/0 x 80 get automatically converted to 0x3F value?

  I try to use LabVIEW to generate a binary file custom that we'll load in an EEPROM, so all data in the binary file is stored as values of U8. I have a "template" file, and eventually I'll take the logic implemented to replace the fields with the data from the true value. However, I am struck by the anomaly that when I just read the file in LabVIEW and then réécrirait, all the values 0x80 and more are truncated to 0x3F value. Has anyone seen this before, and is there a solution?

  I noticed writing the value 0 x 80 directly to one generates a binary file (such as a U8) 0 x 90, 0 x 70 being written in the binary file. It is also rather undesirable, as it adds additional bytes in the bytestream, and the bytes of EEPROM must be in exact locations.

  

  

  Join your data file.

  This program is to give the images below?  Are you sure that LabVIEW is to write the bytes differently?  I really doubt that.

• Remove some fonts ligatures if follow-up greater than 0

  I import files with certain fonts with follow-up set to different sizes. Some fonts with some ligatures do not work when monitoring is a value greater than 0 without first turning off the Standard Ligatures. I use a script that checks to see if these certain fonts are active and if yes then disable ligatures for this font.

  My knowledge of javascript is very basic and I have created this script from especially copy and paste and change things, I found in the guide to script. So, I'm sure that my code could use some better organize. I got it first with a bunch of cases identified and then discovered that I could use the | use multiple values so I thought this might be a better way to write it?

  I want to add another if the statement that first checks to see if these fonts have followed together whatever it is greater than 0, and if yes, then turn off ligatures, but if not keep as their market. They work a lot when the tracking is at 0 and I would like to be able to use them again instead of completely disable the.

  var docRef = app.activeDocument;
  
      for (var w = 0; w < docRef.textFrames.length; w++) {
          var textRef = docRef.textFrames[w];
          if ((textRef.textRange.characterAttributes.textFont == textFonts.getByName('Skitch')) ||
              (textRef.textRange.characterAttributes.textFont == textFonts.getByName('AmarelinhaBold')) ||
              (textRef.textRange.characterAttributes.textFont == textFonts.getByName('Amarelinha')) ||
              (textRef.textRange.characterAttributes.textFont == textFonts.getByName('Zalderdash')) ) {
              textRef.textRange.characterAttributes.ligature = false;
          }
      }
  
  redraw();
  
  
  

  Again, I am very new to javascript, but I think that this should be a fairly simple addition? I honestly don't know even if the redraw(); is it necessary? Finally, I want to add to another script to import.

  Thanks for your time!

  It's ok, to optimize well enough, you can make a variable of any object that is called repeatedly, for example characterAttributes, moreover, there is that one way to know if you must redraw(), remove it and if you see that your code works, then it is not necessary

  var docRef = app.activeDocument; 
  
  for (var w = 0; w < docRef.textFrames.length; w++) {
      var textRef = docRef.textFrames[w];
  
      var charAttributes = textRef.textRange.characterAttributes;
      var textfont = charAttributes.textFont;
  
      if ((textfont == textFonts.getByName('Skitch')) ||
          (textfont == textFonts.getByName('AmarelinhaBold')) ||
          (textfont == textFonts.getByName('Amarelinha')) ||
          (textfont == textFonts.getByName('Zalderdash')) ) {
          if (charAttributes.tracking >= 1) {
              charAttributes.ligature = false;
          }
      }
  }
  

• Error messages for cross validation rules does not properly

  We have implemented two rules of cross validation for our table GL accounts flexfield combinations.  We had implemented the first rule, and it was working properly and displays the error message associated with the rule.  When we added a second rule with a different error message, the application correctly applied the rule, however, now when a new combination of COA violates the first rule, the error message that is displayed is the second rule we created.  How can we get the error messages to be displayed for the correct error?

  Matt

  Yes, if you say that when the 3 segment is actually "OPEX", then it seems to me that the Include and Exclude are simply reversed for what you describe as the needs of the company. When you make a rule, the simplest way to define this term is usually with a universal Include statement (that is to say, we want that all combinations of account), then from there to make a statement that says Yes all except these (the exclude statement).

  Aware in Opex Department will exercise a universal declaration currently, which means that all of these accounts are not allowed (again, except if 7-9 segments have something else of zeros, while they may be permitted).

  If your site back how intervals are defined between the Include and Exclude in the Department and Opex, once registered, you can see if this gives now what you are looking for. If segment 3 is supposed to have a range rather than the value "OPEX", then the exclusion may need further tweaking and we can discuss that further if you wish. With the way in which it will be set to this change, it will not allow a segment 2 to 00000 if the Segment 3 is "OPEX" during a new combination.

  Please mark answers 'Proper' or 'Useful', as appropriate, to facilitate solutions to the other participants of the RTO.

• Validation rule is not suitable for the calculated figure

  Hello
  
  I want to add a validation rule in my data form. My requirement is in the form of data, I want the value of line 2 should be greater than (value of line 1 * 0.2).
  Now when I am trying to solve this problem through validation rule I do not find these conditions that are consistent with this case. Is there a way to get out of this scenario in order of validation?
  
  Thanks in advance.

  Hello. So you have at least two segments in your dataform (line1, line2)
  As we cannot make math operators with cell values in the validation rules, it seems that you must create formulas row3 (with the hide option)
  It's very simple, as follows: [1] * 0.2
  And then, you can create your validataion rule:
  Value of the row IF 2<= row="" value="">
  Then the cells of process...

  You can also include additional conditions for missing values in lines 1, 2, as appropriate

• FDM Validation rules

  I wrote a validation rule FDM for the audit report. I want to check the value of assets - shares - commitment. As I wrote this code, the report seems good too long that the result of this calculation is not zero. But if the result is zero, the line is marked as ERROR. Any ideas on how to avoid it?

  This is the logic of the rule that we use:

  fun:

  Dim dblVal

  dblVal = ABS (|, YourAssetAcctHere, [high PEAK], Allcustom1, Allcustom2, Allcustom3, AllCustom4L, |-|, YourLiabilityandEquityAccountHere, [high PEAK], Allcustom1, Allcustom2, Allcustom3, Allcustom4L, |)

  If dblVal< 5="">
  "Past the validation rule.
  RESULT = True

  ElseIf dblVal > = 5 and dblVal<= 10="">
  ' Pass the Validation, emits warning
  RESULT = True
  RES. PstrCheckMessage1 = "WARNING!" Trial balance is unbalanced.

  ElseIf dblVal > 10 then
  ' Validation failed
  RESULT = False
  RES. PstrCheckMessage1 = "Trial Balance is out of balance, please correct!

  End If