0x8004210C – Outlook 2003 error

31 Mar

I was gone for almost a week and had not downloaded personal email and there were some 180 emails to download. Every time I attempted to download, Outlook 2003 would not complete the download normally and when I would start again, the download started with 1 of 180 emails, every time.
I thought maybe just downloading headers would get a good download completion, but no.

So I logged in to the web email site, and deleted most of the emails and then went back to Outlook, which now failed downloading with this error:

(Account Name) Receiving’ reported error (0x8004210C) : ‘Some messages you marked for download are no longer available on the server.’

Since the download of email failed with the above error, the email server was not marking the emails as downloaded.
I tried deleting these header records in Outlook, but couldn’t. After a search on the web, I thought I was going to have to create a new data file. But then I found the “Shift-delete” solution. I did not have to recreate anything or copy anything.

Just select the orphan header records, and press SHIFT+DELETE.  Answer Ok to the permanent delete warning and it will appear the header records still exist, but these should go away with another “Send/Receive Email”.

Success! Success!

Thanks to: http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?217126-Outlook-How-to-delete-Headers-(Not-as-simple-as-it-sounds!)

Tape Alert

25 Sep

I loaded the magazine in a TS2900 IBM tape storage device, and during the inventory phase, the accessor (or carrier) started making a grinding sound. Like it was hitting the limit of movement, but still trying to move. The system generated a “Tape Alert” email:

Subject: Library Event Report
01/01/2008 22:24:52
ACCESSOR HWError(error, 2) CHK=0082

Contact IBM Service.

Vendor ID : IBM
Product ID : 3572-TL
F/W Revision : 0024.0000
Serial Number : 00000******
IP Address : ***.***.***.***

Drive 1 : IBM ULT3580-HH5 FW_REV:C7RD

Power cycling had no effect. I removed the magazine with manual pin release, but the carrier was too deep for me to reach it. So I opened a case with IBM.

IBM technician came in, varied off the tape drive, powered off, unplugged all cables, and we removed it from the rack and opened the case. There was a loose tape in the carrier’s path! The tape retaining tabs seemed to work OK, but they are a little weak??

Now I know.

From the web access, while there was a problem, a window would pop:
“Inventory Command Error”
-Inventory command execution failure. (ASC/ASCQ:40/80) “DIAGNOSTIC FAILURE ON COMPONENT 80”

Gartner overview of Warehouse Management Systems

18 Jul

Gartner’s take on WMi, which is the application I spend most of my time on, WMi version 2012:

Manhattan Associates (Warehouse Management for IBM i)

  • Manhattan Associates’ Warehouse Management for IBM i is a very mature, stable and proven product, with more than 20 years on the market.
  • Warehouse Management for IBM i is a functionally robust and proven WMS application, with a notable group of long-tenured and quite complex WMS customers.
  • Although the product is mature, the vendor continues to invest dedicated R&D in this version. Manhattan has built integrations to its other SCE offerings, such as labor management, slotting, transportation management and SCP.
  • Customer references note the stability and scalability of the solution.
  • It’s the most robust and well-supported RPG/IBM i WMS available. It’s primarily sold to retail, with a particular strength in apparel.
  • There is a very loyal IBM i community, and Manhattan is one of the few vendors still committed to supporting robust offerings in the space, which helps these users extend their IBM i investments.
  • Manhattan Associates’ Warehouse Management for IBM i offering is developed in RPG/IBM i, and RPG expertise is becoming increasingly difficult to secure.
  • For intraproduct integration (for example, WMS to transportation management system [TMS]), the vendor leverages a variety of data communication methods that are chosen based on a specific client’s needs for a given size of data payload or functionality, which is then enabled by Manhattan’s integration layer.
  • Warehouse Management for IBM i lacks the strategic emphasis of Manhattan’s WMOS.
  • The traditional green-screen UI is becoming less acceptable to users who are used to Windows and Web-based Is.
  • This is not the strategic direction for the vendor.


HS: I would mention that MarkMagic (from Cybra), a separate but included product, is used for generating shipping labels. 

Within WMi,  there are 2 separate products, the Warehouse Management System and the Transportation Execution (TE) system.  I believe Manhattan does offer modular versions of the WMS or the TE product, but it is usually a combined product.  As a result there is complexity in the code between WMS and TE that has thrown me off a few times, in part because there are some functions and data that are duplicated.  The 2 products also have UI differences that can be nettlesome.

Sum of Cardex entries must equal Item Location totals

15 Feb

On JD Edwards (JDE), the sum of cardex entries must equal item location totals.  The SQL query below will find exceptions to this rule.  These exceptions are usually due to failed transactions, so you’ll want daily monitoring.

with LOCN as (SELECT distinct limcu, liitm, sum(lipqoh) as LOCNtot , lilocn FROM library.f41021  group by limcu, liitm, lilocn order by limcu, liitm, lilocn),

LDGR as (select ilmcu, ilitm, illitm, illocn, sum(iltrqt) as Ldgtot FROM library.f4111 group by ilmcu, ilitm, illitm, illocn)

select trim(limcu), liitm, trim(substr(illitm,1,16)), lilocn, LOCNTOT, LDGTOT, LOCNtot – Ldgtot DIFF from locn inner join ldgr on limcu = ilmcu and liitm = ilitm and lilocn = illocn where LOCNtot <> ldgtot order by ilmcu, illitm, illocn

Item ledger (cardex) = F4111

Item location = F41021


Error:13 – PLD upload to UPS.com

14 Feb

I’ve run into this issue a few times on WMi (Warehouse Management for iSeries) version 260.  The program, TPM262, has this response from UPS.com:

Error: 13 – Èãã×añKñ@ñðð@à £  ¤

Error encountered when transmitting, retransmission required.

A resubmission of the PLD to UPS results in an “already submitted” response.

I haven’t sent this to Manhattan Associates nor UPS.  A Google search did not provide an explanation either.  But it rang a bell today because recently, our CNC was having issues with Text Conversion on the IFS in iSeries Navigator, V6R1, with service pack 42423.

I did a little ASCII to EBCDIC conversion, using a table I found on the web, and it looks like the response begins with HTTP/1.1 …….?  I’m not sure of the rest.

HTTP/1.1 turns up on a few Google searches, so I think I have a way into this issue.