Our 7.6.04 SP1 (minus Analytic/Dashboards/SRM) has 137 fields above 1000000000.
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Joe Martin D'Souza <jdso...@shyle.net>wrote: > ** > > Yes BMC has definitely started using the bottom range of the 1000000000 > mark onwards from as early as ITSM 6.3 I think.. You will see those fields > if you do a query for: > > select fieldid, fieldname from field where fieldid >= 1000000000; > > If you have no fields of your own that you have created in that range, you > will see a list of fields that exist which are all BMC created fields.. > There are quite a few of them. Don’t have a system I can query against right > now or I’d send in the list on a 7.6.04. > > Joe > > *From:* David Durling <durl...@uga.edu> > *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2011 9:15 AM > *Newsgroups:* public.remedy.arsystem.general > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT) > > ** > > Also, having 9 numbers in a row might trigger false positives if you do a > security scan on a system (like a PC containing def files) to try to detect > United States social security numbers. Seems like might have happened for > me once.**** > > **** > > So allowing alphabetical characters, or maybe using the 1,000,000,000 range > (though it sounds from Jennifer like BMC’s already started using the bottom > of that a little) might avoid that.**** > > **** > > David**** > > **** > > David Durling**** > > University of Georgia**** > > **** > > **** > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Jason Miller > *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2011 4:42 AM > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)**** > > **** > > ** **** > > That is a pretty sweet idea. You could prefix field IDs like forms and > workflow.**** > > On Sep 8, 2011 10:00 AM, "Joe Martin D'Souza" <jdso...@shyle.net> > wrote: > > > > Sometimes I wish BMC changed this field ID structure just a weeeee bit.. > > > > Instead of having just numerical ID’s, they modified their internal meta > data structure a bit that Field ID’s could accommodate characters as well.. > Then you could actually have meaningful Field ID’s instead of having to come > up with some sort of code to choosing your next Field ID.. Reserved ranges > could still be retained doing this and may even have the flexibility to > designing ‘Keyword’ kind of reserved fields. It just may open up more > possibilities.. > > > > Joe > > > > > > From: Jason Miller > > Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM > > Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > > > ** I agreed that it takes more work to keep track of your field IDs but > the consistency pays off later. I brought back a numbering scheme when I > returned to my current employer. We have have been using it now for 3 years > and it is paying off on how easy it is to share common workflow and > "foundation" forms. > > > > The trick is to get into the habit of keeping track of the last used > field ID for the type of field you and adjusting the ID before you save a > new field. Being able to sort on Field ID/Name in Dev Studio helps as well > as ARUtilities provides a quick list (and is easy to copy the field number > to the clipboard). There have been a few POCs where we have created rapid > prototypes using the default IDs and then later when we got the go ahead for > the project used archgid and a CSV file exported from ARUtilities. > > > > Here are the number ranges we use. > > Range Type Starting Ending # of Fields > > Dynamic Group Fields 60001 N/A > > > > Data Fields (Saved) 600010001 600016999 6998 > > Shared Data Fields (Saved) 600017001 600018999 1998 > > Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019001 600019699 698 > > Shared Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019701 600019999 298 > > Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998 > > Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 600029999 2998 > > Views 600100000 N/A > > > > Groups 1200000 1299999 99999 > > > > We also have a fairly long list of common field such as First Name > <600018048>, Last Name <600018049>, Serial Number <600017503>, zTmpCharVar01 > <600019701>, zTmpIntVar01 <600019721>, txtHeader <600027008>, etc. Right now > it is just a spreadsheet but I have been wanting to make it a Remedy app for > a while. What would be really cool is to integrate the app with Dev Studio > so it automatically picks the next ID based on the field type. :) > > > > Jason > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Susan Palmer <suzanpal...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > ** > > David, > > > > Personally I'd stay out of the less than 600000000 range simply because > that is BMC's range. One never knows what the future brings. And even though > your custom forms may never be 'in' a BMC Application you may want to use > them inconjunction with one and you don't want any gotchas from the past > biting you in the ###. > > > > When I first started this implementation 9 years ago I thought it would > nice to know where the 'home' location of a field (what form) was and I > assigned ID's based on the field's 'home' location so that I knew the > origination of the data. But whatever plan you decide on it just needs to be > uniform so you can maintain your sanity. It's all just good practice and > establishing a habit. > > > > Good luck, > > Susan > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Durling <durl...@uga.edu> wrote: > > > > ** > > Thanks Mike & Susan, > > > > > > > > So it sounds like the 536xxxxxx-599xxxxxx range is not reserved for any > special use. Rather, it’s just that 600xxxxxx-999999999 is a convenient > range to maintain custom IDs in that is unlikely to be auto-assigned by the > system (unless someone actually added enough IDs to reach 600000000). > > > > > > > > This is a one-developer custom setup, and I am trying to weigh the > advantage of me manually assigning IDs over the convenience of letting ARS > do it. I have run into the situation where trying to map a push fields or > something was tedious because I had not kept consistent use of field ids (so > I couldn’t just match based on ID), so I do see that advantage. > > > > > > > > David > > > > > > > > David Durling > > > > University of Georgia > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike) > > Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 10:07 AM > > > > > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > > > > > ** > > > > I agree - we don’t have 399,999,999 fields (closer to 22K). No problem > with the number of possible Field IDs. Not even close. > > > > > > > > Mike White > > > > EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com > > > > Office 813.978.2192 > > > > > > > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Susan Palmer > > Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:53 AM > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > > > > > > > ** > > > > I want to know who is going to use more fields than range 600000000 > through 999999999 can provide! Even for BMC that might be a challenge. > > > > > > > > Since we're a custom shop I always make sure the field ID for fields used > on multiple forms are the same. ARUtilities helps me easily see what field > ID is available across several forms. > > > > > > > > Susan > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:57 AM, White, Michael W (Mike) < > michael.wh...@verizon.com> wrote: > > > > We reserve ranges of field IDs (> 600M) by application to avoid conflict > and preserve ability to share workflow later. > > > > 536M range (system-generated) is risky in this regard. Two different > kinds of fields on two different forms could be assigned the same id. Later > copying/pasting a field onto a new form, such as to add functionality to the > new form, could conflict if the id is already in-use. > > > > Record ID is always Field ID 1. Similarly, where we have to keep > instances of a kind of field (Nodename, Site-ID, and many others in our > case), we use the same Field ID. We use a cross-reference product to plan > for changes, which reserved Field IDs helps with (as do field naming > conventions). We can easily find like fields by their ID or name. > > > > > > Mike White > > EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com > > Office 813.978.2192 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of David Durling > > Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > > > Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community > have chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting > at the 536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a > new form? > > > > According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be > used for ARS 7.1 and 7.5. > > > > David Durling > > University of Georgia > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > > > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike) > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM > > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > > > > > "I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for > custom > > > development.". > > > > > > We roll our own and use that range. > > > > > > Mike White > > > EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com > > > Office 813.978.2192 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > > > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM > > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > > > > > "One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ." > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > > > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM > > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > > > > > Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so > numbers larger > > > than that stump me. :) > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > > > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM > > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > > > > > Huh. I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the > issue. I > > > seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom > > > development. Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I > don't > > > recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000. > > > > > > Jennifer Meyer > > > Remedy Technical Support Specialist > > > State of North Carolina > > > Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division > ITSM & > > > ITAM Services > > > Office: 919-754-6543 > > > ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000 > > > jennifer.me...@nc.gov > > > http://its.state.nc.us > > > > > > 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM > > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > > Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > > > > > Hello Listers, > > > ARS 7.6.03 > > > MS SQL Server 2005 > > > VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise > > > I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the > > > following response when I create fields. > > > "You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the > BMC > > > reserved range. Do you want to continue?" > > > I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved > field ids > > > but outside? > > > Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message? > > > The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and > 1,587,711,199 > > > > > > Thanks, > > > --- > > > John J. Reiser > > > Remedy Developer/Administrator > > > Senior Software Development Analyst > > > Lockheed Martin - MS2 > > > The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. > > > Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased > by me > > > > > > > > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > > > > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > > > > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > > > > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > > attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"**** > > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ **** > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
