Link field naming series doesn't work for serial number generation?

Hi Everyone,

I’m trying to add item_code to the automated serial number list but it doesn’t seem to work… any idea why?
I’ve tried:

All just returned item_code as ITEM_CODE.
How can I enable link field reference to serial number generation ?

Hi all…

I’m also experiencing error for serial number generation in Sales Invoices.
The serial number are missing in order. ie.


here 11, 12 and 16 is missing.

Kindly do the needful to correct this error in v10.1.50
I’ve not updated self hosted erpnext to v10.1.51.

Thanks in advance.

Hello, anyone can point me in the right direction? I would also like to include the batch number into my auto serial number generation, how do I go about doing it?

1 Like

You seem to be using two prefixes - what ordering are you expecting? Naming series reset issue

Hi Clarkej, are you answering me? I’m not sure.

But my problem is not about using how many prefixes…

It’s naming series not working in serial number generation

Are these not two prefixes? What is your actual versus expected result, IOW exactly what is the error you refer to here?

Not Really clarkej… that’s ameerbabu hijacking my thread with his own set of problems.
I guess he’s just having problems with serial numbers skipping the normal order.

For me, my issue is when i Insert :

these into the serial number generation input box, the end result would give me:


I would like to find out how can I enable the ITEM_CODE to be references to the actual item code of the serialized item itself instead . Just like how it was supposed to work as “Custom Field” in naming series.
For instance if the item_code is GY2020, then the end result should be:



Thanks Jonathon pardon my confusion, check out make_autoname

For eg this Can't edit Naming Series - #8 by iqbalzahir

and Tyler’s good notes Search results for '@tmatteson make_autoname' - ERPNext Forum

Thank you clarkej ! Appreciate the direction greatly!

We will take a look at this and see how we can fix this.

Sorry. I was not meant to hijack your thread. But I just intimated about the similar error I experienced.

“about the similar error I experienced”

Not to hijack this thread further, ameerbabu you need to give clear evidence to support that your ‘error’ case is in the ERPNext court, and not on your part re how naming series works ie it’s design use and so too it’s limitations?

You will find much discussion to inform yourself here of misuse what you prefer to declare an ERPNext error…please start a new thread and make your case ok?