We're trying to build something to track inventory. I'm just wondering if there's something in CDS built-in that can manage different versions of a record. Say somebody updated an Item entry, changed the name from Samsung to Samsung Inc. or something, older transaction records should retain a reference to the older version, and display as such, but lookups should turn up fields from the latest version of that record.
I see that the fields
are standard for all CDS entities. How would I make use of these?
I've done a test version of this project with SQL server. In that implementation, every "modification" is really a new entry in the table of items, with the same part number. The ID of each record is generated by the server through autoincrement. So we could manage versioning because other things could just reference the item ID. For viewing the items, we'd just group by part number, and pick the one with the highest ID among them which would be the latest version. Would I have to replicate that in CDS, or is it a built-in feature that I can configure?
Solved! Go to Solution.
Hi @yanalex981 ,
I'm afraid it's not supported to record other version's data in CDS currently.
There's only one record named "modified" to record the time that the item is modified.
No more settings about this.
I suggest you express your views on PowerApps Ideas Forum. Your precious feedback will be very helpful for our work.
https://powerusers.microsoft.com/t5/PowerApps-Ideas/idb-p/PowerAppsIdeas
Your test version in SQL's thought is very good.
For now, to achieve this function, I suggest you replicate that in CDS.
Best regards,
Hi @yanalex981 ,
I'm afraid it's not supported to record other version's data in CDS currently.
There's only one record named "modified" to record the time that the item is modified.
No more settings about this.
I suggest you express your views on PowerApps Ideas Forum. Your precious feedback will be very helpful for our work.
https://powerusers.microsoft.com/t5/PowerApps-Ideas/idb-p/PowerAppsIdeas
Your test version in SQL's thought is very good.
For now, to achieve this function, I suggest you replicate that in CDS.
Best regards,
User | Count |
---|---|
177 | |
118 | |
86 | |
44 | |
41 |
User | Count |
---|---|
241 | |
153 | |
127 | |
77 | |
72 |