Transfers & Payments appear out of order

[David Carlson]

Adrien,

It appears that we are still not quite on the same page in our
interpretation of the issue.  Are you saying that in a given account the
payment and transfer button transactions sort differently than transactions
created by other methods?  If so, that may be a bug.  Or not.  A developer
may know.

I am a long-time user, but not a user of business features.

In general, GnuCash does not claim to manage intra-day balances.  It
essentially claims to balance at the end of the day.  IMO, If you actually
have a need to have that level of granularity you may need to look
elsewhere.

David C



On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Adrien Monteleone <
adrien.monteleone at gmail.com> wrote:

> Sorry I wasn’t clear.
>
> If I enter three transactions (not using the post payment or transfer
> button functions) they retain the order in the register in which I entered
> them. (we’re talking transactions all posted with the same date here) If I
> entered them out of actual time order, I simply use the NUM field to fix
> this. Payments posted using the business features and the Transfer button
> don’t behave this way.
>
> Let’s say I enter some expense transactions, then I post a customer
> payment to me, then I enter a transfer from a savings account to cash, even
> though all have the same date and even though I put in sequential numbers
> in the NUM field to intentionally order them in the register, GC will list
> these transactions in the following order:
>
> Transfers
> Payments
> Expenses (or any other transactions)
>
> It does not matter if I enter the other transactions before posting the
> payment, the payment always jumps to the first transaction of the day in
> the register. It also does not matter if I put a 1 in the expense
> transaction NUM field and a ‘2’ in the payment NUM field. Those numbers are
> there, but GC refuses to place the expense transaction before the payment
> transaction.
>
> The same goes for transfers using the transfer button. (but manually
> moving money from one asset account to another, or any other ‘transfer’
> DOES show up in the order it was entered and DOES respect the ordering of
> the NUM field)
>
> This has been an issue for me because I may have issue finding ‘missing
> money’ or even just reconciling my cash, and I usually resort to matching
> up how much I had on hand after particular transactions. If they refuse to
> appear in the correct order, that can be difficult to impossible.
>
>
> > On May 5, 2017, at 12:27 PM, Derek Atkins <derek at ihtfp.com> wrote:
> >
> > Adrien,
> >
> > On Fri, May 5, 2017 1:09 pm, Adrien Monteleone wrote:
> >> Something that’s been nagging me for some time, and my apologies if
> there
> >> has been discussion of this in the past, but is it intended behavior for
> >> transfers and payments to always appear as first entries on a particular
> >> date instead of the order of when they are actually entered? Is it also
> >> intended behavior to have transfer and payment transactions ignore the
> NUM
> >> field so that they cannot be manually ordered? Or is this a bug?
> >
> > Default sort order is:
> > * Post Date (i.e., the date you select in the register)
> > * Number (this is a numeric compare; any non-numeric entries get treated
> > as 0)
> > * Date Entered (this is the order you enter your transactions).
> >
> > So yes, by default your entries are sorted based on the date you assign
> to
> > them, not when you enter them.
> >
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Adrien
> >
> >> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> >> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> >
> > -derek
> >
> > --
> >       Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745
> >       derek at ihtfp.com             www.ihtfp.com
> >       Computer and Internet Security Consultant
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> -----
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>