YES, or have i missed a setting somewhere to stop this.
In my mind this is potentially a big issue for any multiterminal setup, especial with mobile terminals or say if waitesses wrote food orders on paper tickets and left them for a bar tender to ring in when he had time, then with two terminals one tender is ringing in the food one terminal a and the customer hapens to be at the bar getting a round of drinks with another bartender meaning the ticket is open twice - only one will be saved.
The only issue I see with that is he could then have two (maybe more) tickets with no entity tagged.
JUST A THOUGHT
But following your comment here I imagine a solution where what if;
He starts 1 customer on a terminal, doesnt logout then starts another round on the other till, WHAT IFā¦
Part of the login script/process was that in one way or another a user with tickets not assigned to a table is;
If they have one āunallocated ticketā it opens straight in as the switch user setup works
If they have multiple āunallocated ticketsā - rather than going to last open they so to a list of their part/unfinished tickets,
For the second option I would imagine using a staff entity (however I feel that is not the best way if you need to always setup each staffs entity), PERHAPS if posible they could go to a 'ticket list with tickets tagged with their username?!?!?
Food for thought maybe - I wouldnt even attempt this myself without full step by step directions lol.
If in your process you happen to just have the basic of prevent user logging in twice or even just message saying your already logged in please let me know so I can implement to prevent this posibility as system is due to go live next weel :-/
Rather than hard coding this because there might be some reason a business would want to use this ability we can stop it with automation. We have access to Ticket Opened event. We would have access to Ticket ID as there is no way to open same ticket twice unless it has been closed at least once. We can simply use some constraints checking for matching IDās Preventing it from opening twice. This might take some more complex setup work and it may only be possible with a future release but I will explore it with v4.1.82
Im not sure if we are looking at exact same issue, but if the ticket is opened at the same time on two terminals - only one can save (i think which ever one closes first)
I cant see how anyone would want the ability to open a ticket twice and to loose any changes made.
What might be a good option for hard coding was that there was somthing a bit like the āticket lockā when you print a bill so that if opened on another machine it was locked to them, however this would want to not be so easily unlocked like the print bill lock, so maybe at least a notification saying open on another terminal ot even a notification is was open elsewhere when you go to unlock it.
HOWEVER if it was open on another teminal and your changes arent saved the only reason would be to print the bill or take payment but if its open elsewher likely hood is that they are making changes so a printbill or payment would be wrong.
I know what I mean but not sure if that makes complete sence to read.
You make perfect sense. But I know it sounds strange to you however someone may want the ability to open a ticket twice at same time.
So instead of hardcoding a solution to fix one specific setup why not allow it and use automation to solve many solutions.
Anyway I am working on it and so far so good.I think this is definitely doable.
I know what your saying, to be honest if nothing else im intrigued as to what situation it would be preferable.
I would imagine that being able to open a ticket more than once over multiple stations would be the setup which needs to be enabled rather than configuring to prevent, is that makes sence.
Now you tell me. 
Good to know. I just didnāt want to have to mess with my server, but I can certainly do that on my Laptop where I test everything.
There āisā a lot of hardcoded stuff to handle multi terminal operations. Adding orders in a single ticket from multiple terminals at the same time is intentionally allowed and it does not overwrites orders entered from other terminal. This is a common case when there is +20 people sitting around same table and multiple waiters receives orders. Of course there are exceptions. It wonāt allow adding orders from one terminal and receiving payment from another terminal. In this case first action gets saved.
Honestly I didnāt understand why user creates a ticket on one terminal, leave it open and create same ticket on other terminal? Maybe I misunderstood what youāre trying to solve.
1 Like
Yes it is a bad practice. That generally breaks conversation lol.
The real issue he is trying to solve is having it detect when a User is logged in and not allow multiple logins with same user on multiple terminals. Have it auto logout the user on Terminal A if he logs into Terminal B. The ticket thing was added in later in discussion.
I agree that the login/logout thing is nice feature So I am building it to test. But the ticket issue is another story.
My apologies,
This must have been fixed between v3 i was using and v4 now, have only recently upgraded to latest v4 following pc upgrade inc win7.
Just tried it and it merges them together, sorry I sould have checked on newset version before raising the question.
1 Like
When Auto Logout setting enabled for a terminal it already auto logouts user when he finishes ticket. If user left a ticket open we should not auto logout as we donāt know if we should submit or cancel that. Someone should decide what to do with it.
At least I think soā¦ 
2 Likes
I would agree a person should use one till, and would not be an issue if was only me (or perople who understand the system) however as with absolutly everything now day you have to cater for the absolute weakest link, proably someone who has onyl just worked out they can use there finger to operate the touch screen, LOL
You have a good point and this point stopped me from spending much more time on this for now. I will pause and discuss this some more.
What if we still wanted to use some automation with thisā¦ I can still see a reason for logging out user on terminal b when they log into Terminal a. So now question is what to do with a ticketā¦Well if its an open ticket maybe we should not allow user to log into another terminalā¦ Or if its a ticket that was submitted and then reopened for some reasonā¦ maybe we should make it tag ticket and close it then log user out when user attempts to log into a different terminal.
I can still see how this would be useful. Not every business wants Auto Logout. But they may not want user to login to two tills same time. So in this case we are exploring how to deal with this.
I favor the system to log the user out from Terminal A when they attempt to log into Terminal B. Another method is to simply not allow user to log into another till if already logged in. We could automate that and make it show a warning message that they are logged into specific terminal and it then immediately log them out again.
The simplest solution is to prevent user loging in on second terminal.
The example im thinking of is that with the switch user setup it is posible to log in twice and allocate neiter to a entity .
the open hold ticket setup from the other post would result in the second newer ticket being opened if they were to logout and log back in.
The issue i see is potential for tickets to be open/unpaid but not be directl accessable to standard user/staff via the ticket list with open ticket search.
When first read It sounds like really a useful feature but if we donāt want to allow user to login on multiple terminals there should be a good reason behind that. I mean that feature should solve a problem. What can it solve?
I cant expect complex setup from you, just raised the question.
Would hapily sebtle for directiosn to prevent second login.
Just want to prevent the senario described above.
catering for the weakest like as i said
The example im thinking of is that with the switch user setup it is posible to log in twice and allocate neiter to a entity .
the open hold ticket setup from the other post would result in the
second newer ticket being opened if they were to logout and log back in.
The issue i see is potential for tickets to be open/unpaid but not be
directl accessable to standard user/staff via the ticket list with open
ticket search.
Great question and I think @JTRTech has a specific scenerio in mind he just has not explained it deep enough yet. I think it pertains specifically with a switchuser setup. We may be able to solve this issue another way however. Maybe that Switchuser setup is the real culprit and we should revisit it and modify it a little more.
Lol during whole SambaPOS programming I strictly avoided from implementing features that stops user to do something. We should not stop user just because he didnāt logged out from other terminal.