Redundancy Check Please?

7774.NAV Image 01 - 29 - 2009.bmp (169 KB)Hello,

I’m new to Microsoft Dynamics NAV, and we’re currently using 5.0. I have noticed a peculiarity in the Return Receipt Line table in our database.

It seems that, in Navision, on the Return Receipt Line table there is a line that “inserted” by Navision to link a line item to an Invoice. This row has no other purpose but to link the two pieces of information.

7774.NAV Image 01 - 29 - 2009.bmp (169 KB)

When I check the tables I notice that for every set of line item rows in the Return Receipt Line table there is a row corresponding to the Receipt rowset.

7183.SQL Image 01 - 29 -2009.bmp (244 KB)

0160.SQL Image 01 - 29 -2009.bmp (244 KB)

Why is this? Why is this not a column in the table, or a column in the corresponding header table?

This illustrates two problems IMO. 1. We have excess amount of rows being generated which can dramatically increase the storage on a table. 2. We have created additional overhead to produce redundant data with useless blank columns for that particular rowset.

Can somebody please define why this is the way it is? I’m sure it’s just my lack of understanding the Application, But I would certainly appreciate confirmation and explanation as to why it is the way it is.

Thanks in advance.

Actually, it doesn’t link anything, it’s just a text line. The purpose is simply so that the printed report looks nicer (in the opinion of whoever developed that part).

Awesomeness… That only confirms my suspisions about the people managing this project.

Thanks again.

What do you mean by that? It’s the way the standard product works. You are aware that sometimes, to serve a funcitonal purpose, data is not completely normalized. It’s just one opinion to put that text into an attribute of another record. It’s just one way of kind of grouping return lines on the report. Certainly no basis to draw any conclusions about the type of people that are staffing any project.

You misunderstand me, and you don’t know my situation.

Perhaps, suspisions was not the right choice of words, and perhaps my comment was unnecessary at all. Eitherway I believe the answer to my origional issue has been concluded and I thank you for your input.


Well when you use words like “suspicions” that makes me wonder what you mean, so hence my question “what do you mean by that”. I wasn’t commenting on “your situation”, I was explaining how it works. I have more questions about your case, but if you’re done with it then that’s fine by me.

Always glad to help out, have a nice day