Using REST API, converting transfer orders to item receipts fails when partial lines yield errors. Why do order line numbers begin above 1, and how can multiple fulfillments be processed?
POST https://sample.exampleapi.com/record/v1/transferOrder/{orderID}/convert/itemArrival
{
"shipmentDetails": [
{ "itemLine": 10, "status": "partial" }
]
}
Based on my experience, the root of the conversion problem seems to lie in the API’s handling of internal line identifiers. In my case, the non-sequential numbering was not just a presentation issue—it reflected underlying processing inconsistencies when requests for partial fulfillments were made. I resolved this by synchronizing separate API calls for each partial shipment, subsequently merging the results on my end to build the complete receipt. Investigating the API logs and documentation for subtle parameter nuances helped clarify the adjustments needed to achieve a stable conversion workflow.
Hi all, I’ve been tinkering with similar scenarios and ended up thinking there might be some quirks in how the API assigns line numbers once a fulfillment is partially completed. I noticed that the non-sequential numbering might be an internal mechanism that the system uses to track which parts have been processed, maybe creating separate internal identifiers for different shipments. In my testing, I found that handling multiple fulfillments often required sending separate requests for each partial fulfillment and then stitching those responses together on my side to reflect the complete receipt.
I’m curious, have any of you encountered this behavior with nested fulfillment lines? It almost seems like the API expects a series of targeted updates rather than a one-shot conversion when dealing with partial lines. What kind of workarounds or additional parameters did you try? Perhaps tweaking the shipmentDetails payload further or even reordering your requests could yield a smoother conversion. Would love to hear your insights or any documentation tips you might have come across!
hey, ive been in a similar boat. i ended up sending one fulfillment per call, which seemed to dodge the api’s quirky numbering. tweaking the api parameters a bit also helped match their internal flow. hope it helps, cheers!
Hey everyone, I’ve also been experimenting with the conversion after fulfilling partial shipments and stumbled upon something interesting. It seems the API’s default behavior of sequencing the order lines can get pretty tricky when multiple partial shipments are involved. I ended up probing a bit deeper into some of the undocumented parameters. For instance, sometimes tweaking the order in which the API processes fulfillment calls might reduce the partial fulfillment errors, almost like you have to guide it through each phase. I noticed that if I introduce a slight delay between the individual multiphase calls or dynamically track which lines have already been processed, things tend to align a bit smoother.
I’m still curious though—has anyone else tried an approach that involves some form of middleware or an external queue that ensures the API handles the partial shipments in a more sequential order? It might be that building a small custom wrapper around the API helps negotiate these quirks automatically. I’m really interested in hearing if another workaround has worked for you or if maybe there’s a hidden parameter in the API docs that we haven’t stumbled upon yet. Let’s share any insights we might have to pave the way for a cleaner solution!
After further analysis and testing, I found that the conversion issue often stems from the API treating each partial fulfillment as a new internal instance rather than a continuation of the existing order. In my experience, fine-tuning the request payload to include a reference that ties each partial fulfillment to its corresponding transfer order helped alleviate the error. Ensuring that each fulfillment call carries an unambiguous identifier for the order line promised a more consistent tracking process, thereby allowing a smoother transition from fulfillment to receipt.