Budgeting
You can let KOSMA renumber a budget, or keep your own numbers, and you know which downstream worries are real and which are not.
Every account and group gets a number when it is created. Insert one later and it gets a number too — but the sequence will no longer read in order, because existing rows are not shifted to make room.
**Renumber** in the toolbar renumbers the whole budget so it reads in order again. A marker on the button tells you when numbering has drifted, so you do not have to check.
Renumbering **overwrites every number**, including ones you set by hand. That is the point, and it is also the reason to decide early which convention a budget follows.
Numbers are editable and accept any combination of characters, so an accounting code that is not a plain number is fine.
**Each number must be unique within the budget.** A duplicate is rejected. If you are used to reusing a number across categories, that no longer works.
**Which to choose.** **Use KOSMA's numbering** unless you have a reason not to. It stays consistent, it survives insertions, and one button restores order. **Use your own** when people reading the budget expect a numbering they already know. What you should not do is mix them: hand-numbering part of a budget and then pressing **Renumber** discards the hand-numbered part without asking.
Your numbering does **not** have to mirror your chart of accounts. The accounting import in cost control matches on the accounting code you map to each account in the mapping set, not on the account number — so renumbering a budget cannot break an import, and an incoming code only arrives unmatched when nobody has mapped it. Mappings are saved as a set, so agreeing them once carries to the next production.
A numbering everyone recognises is still worth settling before the budget is built, and worth putting in a template so the next production inherits it — see [save a budget as a template](/kb/article/save-a-budget-as-a-template).
Markdown