On the note of waiting for an Escalation to run have you noticed in recent releases of Dev Studio you can right click on an Escalation and select "Run Now"? It is there for both Time and Interval escalations. Nice addition!
Jason On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Grooms, Frederick W < frederick.w.gro...@xo.com> wrote: > From the Filter log (and this is even from Application-Query-Delete-Entry > action) > > <FLTR> <TID: 4027734928> <RPC ID: 0000001637> <Queue: Escalation> > <Client-RPC: 390603 > > <USER: AR_ESCALATOR (Pool 1) > /* Sat Dec 10 > 2011 13:27:52.0979 */ > Start filter processing (phase 1) -- Operation - DELETE on > MyFormName - 000000005840476 > > As you can see the filters fire using the Escalation thread. > > > Application-Query-Delete-Entry is a benefit when deleting child form > records. Take the example of the order with line items. Instead of > pushing a value to each line item for the order, you execute the > Application-Query-Delete-Entry in the delete of the order record to delete > the child line items. > > The main reason for using a field to trigger a delete (using a Filter) for > me, is I can then manually trigger the same Filters at any time I need to. > It makes testing my workflow so much easier than waiting for an Escalation > and searching thru the logs. > > Fred > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza > Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2011 12:59 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Application-Query-Delete-Entry > > That shatters a long standing understanding I had about data driven > escalations. I had received this info at a Remedy training facility in > Bracknell in UK years ago, that you ought to help Escalations with Filters > triggered off modifications by the Escalation User in processing 2nd and > 3rd > stage actions. I guess they were wrong when they instructed us so then.. > > That is one of the benefit that they explained of having Filters running > with a Run If of $USER$ = "AR_ESCALATOR" AND whatever else the rest of the > qualification may be.. The other benefit I'm guessing (I wasnt told this > but it makes sense) is if you need to override filter phasing during the > run > of an escalation.. > > Joe > > -----Original Message----- > From: Misi Mladoniczky > Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2011 4:04 AM Newsgroups: > public.remedy.arsystem.general > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Application-Query-Delete-Entry > > Hi, > > Filters triggered by an Escalation, either via Set-Fields or Push-Fields, > will ALWAYS be run in the same thread. > > This has ALWAYS been the case. > > Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011) > > Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11): > * RRR|License - Not enough Remedy licenses? Save money by optimizing. > * RRR|Log - Performance issues or elusive bugs? Analyze your Remedy logs. > Find these products, and many free tools and utilities, at http://rrr.se. > > -----Original Message----- > > Now that you remind me, I actually remember discussing this once with > > you.. > > > > I'll really need to log the workflow to see what thread processes the > > filter > > workflow when filters are executed triggered by the AR_ESCALATOR user. > > > > I was told this in a performance tuning class years ago (version 4.0 - > 4.5 > > days so probably 11 or 12 years ago) that you let escalations perform > > first > > stage actions, and leave any 2nd and 3rd stage actions (deletes, push > > fields, notifications) to be performed by filters that are run using the > > admin thread. Maybe the design was different back then? So this is > > obsolete > > now? > > > > I wish I had a server to verify this :-) > > > > Joe > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: LJ LongWing > > Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 2:18 PM Newsgroups: > > public.remedy.arsystem.general > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > Subject: Re: Application-Query-Delete-Entry > > > > Joe, > > I know this discussion comes up every once in awhile....but you and I > seem > > to differ in our opinions of how it works. > > > > So...based on your statement below, having the escalation set a field, > and > > having a filter fire on that field being set, then performing the delete > > will be 'faster' because of a 'fire and forget' type of mechanism? > > > > I would argue that an action of delete within the escalation, and a > > setfield > > causing a filter to fire that causes the delete are 'the same', in that > > the > > escalation thread does not 'go onto the next record' till after the > > filters > > on the current record are done...so, in essence, the performance of > either > > action would be the same and the escalation thread would still be tied up > > for exactly the same amount of time regardless > > > > At least, that's my understanding :) > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza > > Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 11:33 AM > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > Subject: Re: Application-Query-Delete-Entry > > > > End Date as Linda pointed out should be a field on that form you are > > searching for, represented by 'End Date' in the qualification and not > $End > > Date$.. > > > > That being said, LJ's suggestion is right.. > > > > The qualification should be in the Run If of the Escalation and the run > > process should be > > > > Application-Delete-Entry $SCHEMA$ $Request ID$ > > > > Having an Escalation with no Run If instructs it to be run over the > entire > > data table. You do not want to do that in case you have like a million or > > more records in it.. It may probably hang the escalation thread waiting > > for > > it to complete.. > > > > Also a faster way to do it would be to 'mark that entry for deletion' > > using > > a tag on a field created for that. This would mean that the Escalation > > would > > do a single update to that table which is a faster operation that > multiple > > deletes and be done with it.. Create a filter that runs if the $USER$ is > > AR_ESCALATOR and the flag for delete is set, to delete that entry. So on > a > > fairly large set of data, although the deletes are still potentially > > happening triggered by that filter, the escalation thread has already > > finished processing the escalation and is ready to take on a new job.. > > > > Joe > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: LJ LongWing > > Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 12:54 PM Newsgroups: > > public.remedy.arsystem.general > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > Subject: Re: Application-Query-Delete-Entry > > > > Larry, > > Your approach is a bit off. An escalation performs a search that > > matches > > your qualification, and then performs your action on ALL records that > > match > > that qualification. So in this case, I would expect your run-if > > qualification to be > > > > ('Status' = "Past") and ($End Date$ < ($TIMESTAMP$ - (86400 * 180))) > > > > Or, whatever qual you want to identify your specific records, > > > > Then, from there, you will be modifying that recordso you wouldnt want > > to then perform an Application-Query-Delete-Entry, you could simply > > perform > > an > > > > Application-Delete-Entry $SCHEMA$ $Request ID$ > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Larry Barnes > > Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 10:23 AM > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > Subject: Application-Query-Delete-Entry > > > > ** > > Hello Listers, > > > > I'm trying to learn how to delete records that are past and the End Date > > is > > more than 6 months prior to todays date. I built the escalation and when > > I > > run it nothing happens. Can someone point in the right directions with > > the > > Run Process syntax. > > > > I'm using SQL 2008 and Windows 2008. ITSM is 7.5 > > > > The form I'm deleting from is: AP:Alternate > > > > Run IF Qualification is: 'Status' = "Past" (also tried without > > setting > > a Run If Qualification) > > > > Run Process is: Application-Query-Delete-Entry "AP:Alternate" > ('Status' > > = > > "Past") and ($End Date$ < ($TIMESTAMP$ - (86400 * 180))) > > > > I have also tried: Application-Query-Delete-Entry "AP:Alternate" > > ('Status' = "Past") and ($End Date$ < ($DATE$ - (86400 * 180))) > > > > > > Thanks in advance for your time, > > > > Larry B > > > > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
