I am selecting from the menu. It seems important to note that it only defaults to "Current transaction" behind the scenes. The filter still looks right in the admin tool. It's abydos that shows "Current transaction".
Anne Ramey *********************************** E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an authorized State Official. -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Mueller, Doug Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 3:18 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Possibly spam: Re: Curious filter issue Anne, The key to the issue you are having are two statements you make: 1) It works if you specify another field 2) Your definition keeps getting set back to "current transaction" from a form reference The second item above means that the system does not see a field reference in the qualification. How are you getting the field name into the qualification? Are you typing it in or are you selecting from the menu? If typing it, are you sure you are spelling/spacing/... it correctly so that it is the correct name (and remember it is the field name not the label in the Admin environment)? It simply doesn't get that as being a field reference. You indicated if you specify a different field it works -- it is understanding that field reference -- and I bet that you don't get reset to "current transaction" in that case in the definition. This is what I would suggest you look at. Doug Mueller -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Ramey, Anne Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 6:25 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Possibly spam: Re: Curious filter issue $NumberOfDays$ is a field on the other (selected) form and does have a value. It's when the filter is working incorrectly that the value isn't getting taken from the selection form properly. I have a work around in place. I set $NumberOfDays$ into an integer field on my form and then do the math on the form as a current transaction. This works fine. I just wanted to know if I was doing something wrong. It appears I may have found a bug. I may want to open a ticket and see what BMC has to say. Anne Ramey *********************************** E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an authorized State Official. -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Matt Worsdell Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 8:40 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Possibly spam: Re: Curious filter issue Hmm ignore that, I re-read your thread and it would appear that what you are saying is that $NumberOfDays$ does not have a value? Is that correct? > You are trying to add an integer to a Timestamp. Rather than do that split > the process, create a display only integer field (IntegerField) and > perform the following. > > Set Fields IntegerField = $TIMESTAMP$ > Set Fields IntegerField = IntegerField + (60*60*24*$NumberOfDays$) > Set Fields RequiredResolutionField = IntegerField > > You can do this all in the same Filter. > > If you ae using ITSM you may find a suitable DisplayOnly integer field you > can use is already created. > > Matt > > >> But I am >> Required Resolution Date (date/time field) to >> $TIMESTAMP$+(60*60*24*$NumberOfDays$) >> >> Required Resolution Date is on the current form, but $NumberOfDays$ is >> from the selected form; it is an integer field on the form I'm >> searching. >> >> Anne Ramey >> Remedy System Administrator >> State of North Carolina >> Office of Information Technology Services (ITS) >> Service Delivery Division >> ITSM & ITAM Services >> Office (919) 754-6521 >> Home Office (919) 842-5420 >> ITS Service Desk : (919) 754-6000 or (800) 722-3946 >> anne.ra...@nc.gov<mailto:anne.ra...@its.nc.gov> >> http://its.state.nc.us<http://its.state.nc.us/> >> >> RHCE, ITIL Foundation >> >> *********************************** >> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the >> North >> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only >> by >> an authorized State Official. >> >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing >> Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 11:58 PM >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Curious filter issue >> >> ** >> Anne, >> The reason it's changing back to 'current transaction' is because you >> aren't setting a field on your form with a field from the search....it's >> an annoying feature, but it's there.... >> >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Ramey, Anne >> Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 7:24 PM >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Curious filter issue >> >> ** >> The filter log is not helpful, it just shows the field being set to the >> current time stamp (because the value isn't being pulled from the form >> it's supposed to be because the filter is incorrectly changing to >> "current >> transaction" from the correct selection criteria). I didn't grab the >> SQL >> log, I'll have to do that and see what it says. >> >> Anne Ramey >> *********************************** >> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the >> North >> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only >> by >> an authorized State Official. >> >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza >> Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 5:56 PM >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Curious filter issue >> >> ** >> Depending on what you have used to set that field, take an active link >> or >> a filter or escalation log and see what happens when that piece of >> workflow fires... >> >> An SQL log might be useful too.. >> >> Joe >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of Ramey, Anne >> Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 5:49 PM >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Curious filter issue >> ** >> I checked, it's Date/Time >> >> Anne Ramey >> *********************************** >> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the >> North >> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only >> by >> an authorized State Official. >> >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza >> Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 4:36 PM >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Curious filter issue >> >> ** >> Anne, >> >> Make sure that the field you have created is not a Date Only field but a >> Date and Time field.. If its a Date Only field then your calculation >> should be $DATE$*$NumberOfDays$. >> >> The Date Only field type uses $DATE$ and is different from the Date and >> Time field type which uses $TIMESTAMP$ for setting values to it.. >> >> Cheers >> >> Joe >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of Ramey, Anne >> Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 3:49 PM >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Curious filter issue >> ** >> I have a set fields action that just doesn't like what I'm setting the >> field to. I'm trying to set a date field using math; I'm trying to set >> Required Resolution Date (date/time field) to >> $TIMESTAMP$+(60*60*24*$NumberOfDays$) >> on some custom forms and it just doesn't work. If I set it with another >> date/time field, it works, but if I try and calculate time using >> timestamp, it doesn't. According to abydos, if I put in the calucation, >> the other part of the action changes from selecting from my form to >> "current transaction"--but this is not reflected on the screen when >> looking at the filter in administrator. I came up with a work around, >> but >> I wonder if this is expected behavior, if I'm doing something wrong, or >> if >> I found a weird bug. Has anyone else seen this type of thing before? >> >> ARS 7.1 >> ITSM 7.0.3 >> CMDB 2.1 p4 >> >> Anne Ramey >> *********************************** >> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the >> North >> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only >> by >> an authorized State Official. >> _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ >> _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ >> _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ >> >> _______________________________________________________________________________ >> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >> attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >> > > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" If this message is a valid email, you can request that future messages from this source be processed normally through the email system by visiting http://www.ncmail.net/whitelist_procedures.htm _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
