Discussions
Stay up-to-date with the latest news from NetSuite. You’ll be in the know about how to connect with peers and take your business to new heights at our virtual, in-person, on demand events, and much more.
Now is the time to ask your NetSuite-savvy friends and colleagues to join the NetSuite Support Community! Refer now! Click here to watch and learn more!
Update your Profile with your Support type to get your Support Type badge.
Expand your NetSuite knowledge by joining our Ask A Guru Live sessions. RSVP on this event now.
Uncover the power of data with the Analytics Hub —your ultimate guide to mastering NetSuite Saved Searches and Reports. Simplify the complex and unlock your organization's true potential. Dive into the Analytics Hub now and soar to new heights!
To help you get the most out of your 2025.2 Release Preview account, review the topics outlined in the 2025.2 Release Preview Guide.
Nominate Your Peers for NetSuite Support Community's Choice of the Quarter! Submit your nomination today.
Intelligent Payment Automation version 1.0.3 is now available in the SuiteApp Marketplace. The SuiteApp, powered by BILL, lets you automate payments, manage vendor details, and bank account information within NetSuite. Learn more
Proposal: abstract super-types
If you are familiar with our WS schema, you know that the record types are broken down quite granularly, and that often many groups of record types are very similar. By "groups" I mean:
* items (InventoryItem, NonInventoryItem, SerializedAssemblyItem, SerializedInventoryItem...)
* entities (Employee, Customer, Contact, Vendor, Partner...)
* events (Task, CalendarEvent...)
Someone on the user group once mentioned they would really appreciate an "Item" type to be defined, which would contain all of the common item fields.
Where currently the type hierarchy is:
Record + InventoryItem + NonInventoryItem + ... + Customer + Partner + ...
it would become:
Record + Item | + InventoryItem | + NonInventoryItem | + ... | + Entity | + Customer | + Partner | + ... |
Pro: could offer the WS users desired flexibility in his or her code. from an API perspective, eliminating the repititon of common fields would clarify what it is that differentiates similar record types from one another.
0