Re: 911: SRM WSDL
Is there a specific reason you want to skip the staging form ? The easiest/ quickest thing would be to configure a SRD that uses Work Order Template and use the OOB WSDL SRM:RequestInterface_Create. Of-course, you could create a custom WSDL that will create a Work Order directly but I would recommend to leverage the SRM:RequestInterface_Create. Thanks Mahesh On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Kathy Morris kathymorris...@aol.comwrote: ** ** Hi, We have a requirement to pass data from a System A (an external system) via WSDL, to generate one Work Order and two tasks. The data from System A is passing variable data (i.e. .first name/last name/location/employee type etc..) Out of the box these are the SRM staging forms: Create: SRM:RequestInterface_Create Update: SRM:RequestInterface OOB these are the SRM Web Services: SRM_RequestInterface_Create_WS SRM_RequestInteface_WS I read the Integration guide, and I believe there is a way to send the data straight from System A to create a Work Order using WSDL web services. Can we skip the staging form? The staging form seem to overcomplicate things. Plus other developers on the list warned to avoid the staging form SRM:RequestInterface_Create. Is there a way to send the data via WSDL from System A to create a Work Order and two tasks. If yes, how? and can this work with a Work Order Template, and send out notifications to end user as to the status? _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
Re: firing active-link on row choice when view field
In case you are trying to load images in the view field, you will need a Call Guide action that does the table loop and sets the images in the view field. Thanks Mahesh On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 5:24 AM, Alvaro Valdes aval...@caser.es wrote: I'm not able to build an active-link that fires on row choice over a cell based table when a view field is defined as one of the columns for display formatting. I've browsing the xample: demo application and there is examples where looks that this caould be done, but I'm not able. Could someone gime me hints on that. Thanks in advance ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org 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
Re: Installation order?
Thank you ! Andrew Somehow is missed it .. Regards, Vishwa Saxena - Original Message - From: Andrew C Goodall ago...@jcpenney.com To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Cc: Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2011 8:18 PM Subject: Re: Installation order? You forgot CMDB. CMDB should come after ARS. Regards, Andrew Goodall Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.com -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of anurag saxena Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:41 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Installation order? Hi Sam, We recnetly completed the installation of V 7.6.04 SP1 and as per BMC's recommandation we folowed the below sequence, AR Server Mid-Tier (can be installed at later stage. Depend on at what stage you want to do the application testing.) ITSM SLM SRM RKM Many thanks, Vishwa Saxena img src=http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif;font color=#4040ff face=systemHAVE A NICE DAY/font - Original Message - From: Sam Cerrato samcerra...@yahoo.com To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Cc: Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2011 6:05 PM Subject: Installation order? Anyone have a good document that can assist me in installing AR Server, Mid-Tier, All Service Desk modules as well as KM, SRM, SLM, Dashboards Analytics etc? I just want to be sure I install in the correct order (if there is one). Thanks, Sam ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org 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 The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that your access is unauthorized, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org 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
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 __ __ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org 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 __ _ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org 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 __ _ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org 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
Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning?
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 __ __ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are __ __ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist
Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning?
I want to know who is going to use more fields than range 6 through 9 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
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.commailto: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 6 through 9 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.commailto: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.commailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com Office 813.978.2192tel:813.978.2192 -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of David Durling Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto: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 2147483647tel: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.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike) Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto: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.commailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com Office 813.978.2192tel:813.978.2192 -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto: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.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto: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.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto: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: 919-754-6543tel:919-754-6543 ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000tel:919-754-6000 jennifer.me...@nc.govmailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov http://its.state.nc.ushttp://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-
Group List Field in User Form
Hi List, If we are pushing values on User form to create New User. In a push field action if we map multiple groups to Group List field why AR server throws Authentication Failed Error? -- Pramod ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning?
Thanks Mike Susan, So it sounds like the 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any special use. Rather, it's just that 600xx-9 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 6). 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.commailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com Office 813.978.2192 From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG]mailto:[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Susan Palmer Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:53 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning? ** I want to know who is going to use more fields than range 6 through 9 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.commailto: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.commailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com Office 813.978.2192tel:813.978.2192 -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of David Durling Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto: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 2147483647tel: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.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike) Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto: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.commailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com Office 813.978.2192tel:813.978.2192 -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto: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.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto: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.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf
Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning?
David, Personally I'd stay out of the less than 6 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 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any special use. Rather, it’s just that 600xx-9 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 6). ** ** 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 6 through 9 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,
Re: 911: SRM WSDL
Hi, We decided to use the OOB staging form WOI:WorkOrderInterface_Create which will create a Work Order. I created a web service and published it. When enter the WSDL URL in a browser, it opens up to an XML file, however I am not sure what I need to do get it to create the actual Work Order. BMC told me that this will automatically work and I did not need to modify the XML file, and I did not need to create a filter. We have data from System A (external). How do I get the XML file to read the data from System A and pass the data into the Work Order. Is there another step. I read the integration guide, and I believe I must be missing a step. . In a message dated 9/8/2011 6:00:57 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, mchand...@gmail.com writes: ** Is there a specific reason you want to skip the staging form ? The easiest/ quickest thing would be to configure a SRD that uses Work Order Template and use the OOB WSDL SRM:RequestInterface_Create. Of-course, you could create a custom WSDL that will create a Work Order directly but I would recommend to leverage the SRM:RequestInterface_Create. Thanks Mahesh On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Kathy Morris _Kathymorris727@aol.com_ (mailto:kathymorris...@aol.com) wrote: ** Hi, We have a requirement to pass data from a System A (an external system) via WSDL, to generate one Work Order and two tasks. The data from System A is passing variable data (i.e. .first name/last name/location/employee type etc..) Out of the box these are the SRM staging forms: Create: SRM:RequestInterface_Create Update: SRM:RequestInterface OOB these are the SRM Web Services: SRM_RequestInterface_Create_WS SRM_RequestInteface_WS I read the Integration guide, and I believe there is a way to send the data straight from System A to create a Work Order using WSDL web services. Can we skip the staging form? The staging form seem to overcomplicate things. Plus other developers on the list warned to avoid the staging form SRM:RequestInterface_Create. Is there a way to send the data via WSDL from System A to create a Work Order and two tasks. If yes, how? and can this work with a Work Order Template, and send out notifications to end user as to the status? _attend WWRUG11 _www.wwrug.com_ (http://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
Re: Performance question CTM:People timing
Joe, well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a large table, you can pin in it memory. Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate. You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the incident form). Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 2:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** For only 140K records I don’t think you need to do anything out of the ordinary to boost up performance. If your statistics were not updated, it does make sense as Oracle didn’t know it had to use indexes and was perhaps attempting table scans assuming the table has no records if the statistics information it had for row count was 0 or thereabouts prior to updating it.. Personally I don’t really think you can consider CTM:People with around 140 K records to be a large object. Its big but not that big enough to be considered to pin to memory.. Joe From: John Sundbergmailto:john.sundb...@kineticdata.com Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:31 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** True... good suggestion. Fundamentally - I was looking for what is normal -- what we were seeing was what we thought was slow. But - just cause you think something is slow - does not mean that it is slow. Sometimes -- you have to look to your neighbors and compare. So - thanks to all that shared their timings and system info. -John On Sep 1, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Guillaume Rheault wrote: ** One more way to make things even faster in Oracle is to pin the underlying T table into memory. Ask the DBA over there to do that -Guilalume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of John Sundberg [john.sundb...@kineticdata.commailto:john.sundb...@kineticdata.com] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 7:25 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Thanks all for the responses. We figured out our slowness. Turns out Oracle statistics had not been updated for 6+ months. Now with 140,000 -- it is near instantaneous on Oracle. -John On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Andrew C Goodall ago...@jcpenney.commailto:ago...@jcpenney.com wrote: Where are you counting from? - query on CTM_People involves multiple queries not just one, so are you just counting time from the main query to the next or the total time to process all queries for that operation? Ours 329ms (from main to last query in operation) - 357,000+ total records - SQL 2008 remote cluster. Regards, Andrew Goodall Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.comhttp://www.jcp.com/ -Original Message- 2011/8/20 John Sundberg john.sundb...@kineticdata.commailto:john.sundb...@kineticdata.com: ** How long does it take your DB system to resolve a query for an exact match on CTM:People where the query is 'Remedy Login ID' = some user id Also -- how many records are in your CTM:People -- and what DB are you using? Our sample system is 800ms - with 40,000 records... , Oracle 11g2 (Please get the timings from SQL log) -John -- John David Sundberg 235 East 6th Street, Suite 400B St. Paul, MN 55101 (651) 556-0930tel:%28651%29%20556-0930-work (651) 247-6766tel:%28651%29%20247-6766-cell (651) 695-8577tel:%28651%29%20695-8577-fax john.sundb...@kineticdata.commailto:john.sundb...@kineticdata.com _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com/ ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.orghttp://www.arslist.org/ attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com/ ARSList: Where the Answers Are The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that your access is unauthorized, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.orghttp://www.arslist.org/ attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com/ ARSList: Where the Answers Are -- John David Sundberg 235 East 6th Street, Suite 400B St. Paul, MN 55101
Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning?
David, There was one version, I think when moving from 4 to 4.5 or somewhere thereabouts, where Remedy Engineering accidently used the starting non-reserved range 536,xxx,xxx that messed up some customizations that were done using that starting non reserved field ID's. Since that time my personal preference was never to use that, even if it is a trim field (line, box, text) you are creating.. Until then I happily used that range for those kind of fields. With the introduction of shared workflow, choosing your field ID's became even more important even for some trim fields like text fields.. So my personal preference was to use the 800,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range but I see nothing wrong with starting from 600,xxx,xxx... Choosing this higher number deliberately, you can almost guarantee yourself that an accidental intrusion by BMC Softwares engineers on the 536,xxx,xxx in any future patches or releases will not impact your customization.. There is hardly a chance they would use the 600,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range deliberately.. Cheers Joe -Original Message- From: David Durling Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general 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 ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers
Re: Performance question CTM:People timing
Yes I agree you would want to avoid pinning a table to memory whose contents are changed continuously by way of modifications or additions.. This would result in frequent memory writes which would beat the purpose of why you choose to pin it to memory in the first place. While the CTM:People table is a good candidate as its contents change less frequently in most standard environments, unless it’s a B2C environment where you maintain your customer base in your CTM:People form, if the table size is as small as 140K, just optimizing searches on it is more than enough, and pinning it to memory is an overkill.. Optimizing searches on this table when records are about that much or even upto half a million, would return the search in less than a fraction of a second anyways.. Joe From: Guillaume Rheault Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:15 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Joe, well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a large table, you can pin in it memory. Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate. You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the incident form). Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 2:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** For only 140K records I don’t think you need to do anything out of the ordinary to boost up performance. If your statistics were not updated, it does make sense as Oracle didn’t know it had to use indexes and was perhaps attempting table scans assuming the table has no records if the statistics information it had for row count was 0 or thereabouts prior to updating it.. Personally I don’t really think you can consider CTM:People with around 140 K records to be a large object. Its big but not that big enough to be considered to pin to memory.. Joe From: John Sundberg Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:31 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** True... good suggestion. Fundamentally - I was looking for what is normal -- what we were seeing was what we thought was slow. But - just cause you think something is slow - does not mean that it is slow. Sometimes -- you have to look to your neighbors and compare. So - thanks to all that shared their timings and system info. -John On Sep 1, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Guillaume Rheault wrote: ** One more way to make things even faster in Oracle is to pin the underlying T table into memory. Ask the DBA over there to do that -Guilalume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of John Sundberg [john.sundb...@kineticdata.com] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 7:25 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Thanks all for the responses. We figured out our slowness. Turns out Oracle statistics had not been updated for 6+ months. Now with 140,000 -- it is near instantaneous on Oracle. -John On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Andrew C Goodall ago...@jcpenney.com wrote: Where are you counting from? - query on CTM_People involves multiple queries not just one, so are you just counting time from the main query to the next or the total time to process all queries for that operation? Ours 329ms (from main to last query in operation) - 357,000+ total records - SQL 2008 remote cluster. Regards, Andrew Goodall Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.com -Original Message- 2011/8/20 John Sundberg john.sundb...@kineticdata.com: ** How long does it take your DB system to resolve a query for an exact match on CTM:People where the query is 'Remedy Login ID' = some user id Also -- how many records are in your CTM:People -- and what DB are you using? Our sample system is 800ms - with 40,000 records... , Oracle 11g2 (Please get the timings from SQL log) -John -- John David Sundberg 235 East 6th Street, Suite 400B St. Paul, MN 55101 (651) 556-0930-work (651) 247-6766-cell (651) 695-8577-fax john.sundb...@kineticdata.com _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 The information transmitted is intended only for
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 60001 298 Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998 Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 60002 2998 Views 60010 N/A Groups 120 129 9 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 6 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 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any special use. Rather, it’s just that 600xx-9 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 6). ** ** 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 6 through 9 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
Group List Field in User Form
Are you logging in as user X and modifying user X's record? John ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning?
Ashish, I am running Dev Studio 7.6.04 SP1 in Base Mode. Everything I do is custom built. I have always tried to use a custom block of Field ID numbers based on a white paper I read many years ago by Barry Lindstrom. It was strange to be told Hey, you're using the field ID number in the correct range, Way 2 Go! 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 -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Ashish Thakur Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:38 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning? Hi John, Can you please check your Devstudio version from Help~About menu ? 7.6.04 Devstudio does throw this warning in Base Development mode when you create a field with id outside BMC reserved range. Regards, Ashish ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org 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 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Override Email Reply
Hi All, My email server is configured to send a reply when an email template is received. However I have a situation where a reply should not be sent. Is there something that can be put in the template to override the reply? Maybe something like Result Template: None ARS 6.3 patch 20 SunOS 5.9 Oracle 9.2 Thanks Mark Mark Brittain Remedy Developer NaviSite - A Time Warner Cable Company mbritt...@navisite.com Office: 315-453-2912 x5335 Mobile: 315-317-2897 This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Override Email Reply
What are the conditions of that situation.. And what did you do to configure the email response when an email template is received? Joe From: Brittain, Mark Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:39 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Override Email Reply ** Hi All, My email server is configured to send a reply when an email template is received. However I have a situation where a reply should not be sent. Is there something that can be put in the template to override the reply? Maybe something like Result Template: None ARS 6.3 patch 20 SunOS 5.9 Oracle 9.2 Thanks Mark Mark Brittain Remedy Developer NaviSite – A Time Warner Cable Company mbritt...@navisite.com Office: 315-453-2912 x5335 Mobile: 315-317-2897 This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning? (RANT)
Sometimes I wish BMC changed this field ID structure just a we 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 60001 298 Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998 Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 60002 2998 Views 60010 N/A Groups 120 129 9 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 6 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 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any special use. Rather, it’s just that 600xx-9 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 6). 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
Re: Installation order?
Great information everyone. Just what I needed! Thanks!! Sam ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Override Email Reply
In the AR System Email Mailbox Configuration form the outgoing mailbox is set to Reply with Entry – Yes. Because other submissions require a reply, I cannot change this to No. So I am look for a way to override this on a email by email basis. Thanks Mark From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:44 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Override Email Reply ** What are the conditions of that situation.. And what did you do to configure the email response when an email template is received? Joe From: Brittain, Markmailto:mbritt...@navisite.com Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:39 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Override Email Reply ** Hi All, My email server is configured to send a reply when an email template is received. However I have a situation where a reply should not be sent. Is there something that can be put in the template to override the reply? Maybe something like Result Template: None ARS 6.3 patch 20 SunOS 5.9 Oracle 9.2 Thanks Mark Mark Brittain Remedy Developer NaviSite – A Time Warner Cable Company mbritt...@navisite.com Office: 315-453-2912 x5335 Mobile: 315-317-2897 This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. _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
Server Statistics - Process time ratios
This is a quick question for other admins that have or are running Server Statistics, particularly on several systems. I am troubleshooting some slowdowns on our ARS 7.1 server, running a heavily customized ITSM 7.0.3. I have started Server Statistics and found the following process time values: Process Time 1/100ths second ARServer Idle Time 16,635,760 API Requests 7,422,478 DB SQL 7,394,727 Entries Calls7,385,638 Get List Entry 7,331,214 Escalation2,194,126 Non DB Restructure36,347 Filter 28,006 Create Entry 23,163 Set Entry 19,428 Delete Entry 1,821 Get Entry Stats 210 Cache Loading 0 FTS 0 Merge Entry 0 I haven't really looked at these before on a normally functioning system, so I'm throwing it out to those who have: Are these relatively normal ratios compared to other systems you've seen; i.e., are API, DB SQL, Entries and Get List process times usually 100x the others'? Thanks for your time! Kelly Logan, Sr. Systems Administrator (Remedy), GMS ProQuest | 789 E. Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346 | Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA | 734.997.4777 kelly.lo...@proquest.commailto:kelly.lo...@proquest.com www.proquest.com ProQuest...Start here. 2010 InformationWeek 500 Top Innovator P Please consider the environment before printing this email. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender, and delete the message from your computer. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
ARERR 372 in arerror.log
Hi all, Here are my system details: ARServer 7.5 patch 7 ITSM 7.6.01 Windows NT MS SQL 2005 AR Server Group with 2 servers This is my first time trying the list out. Recently seeing this getting this error message in the arerror.log. 390603 : Could not create alert event (ARERR 372) Thu Sep 08 11:02:15 2011 Wrong number of parameters or bad parameter values specified in function for the field : SendEMail() 390603 is thread. Thanks Joe Williams ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Test
Test ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: ARERR 372 in arerror.log
Forgot to mention, we are not using Remedy Alert. The alert services is not running. Thanks listers. Joe Williams ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: ARERR 372 in arerror.log
Joe W, You might require an API log at the time that error is occurring to check what parameter was missing.. Meanwhile it will help if you look up your email configuration to make sure that none of the required fields are accidently blank.. It could happen if the configuration was imported and you had a check on making required fields not required as a preference during import or if someone nulled out the value by hitting the DB directly... Joe -Original Message- From: Joseph Williams Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 1:23 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: ARERR 372 in arerror.log Hi all, Here are my system details: ARServer 7.5 patch 7 ITSM 7.6.01 Windows NT MS SQL 2005 AR Server Group with 2 servers This is my first time trying the list out. Recently seeing this getting this error message in the arerror.log. 390603 : Could not create alert event (ARERR 372) Thu Sep 08 11:02:15 2011 Wrong number of parameters or bad parameter values specified in function for the field : SendEMail() 390603 is thread. Thanks Joe Williams ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: ARERR 372 in arerror.log
Joe W, Irrespective to whether or not the services are running or not, alerts are not stopped from being created in the Alerts form.. They still will be when workflow attempts to create them. They just are not sent because the service is not running to poll that form.. So while the alert is being created, there is a missing parameter in the email configuration that is causing that error. Check your email configuration form, or turn on your API logging if you want to catch the culprit.. Joe -Original Message- From: Joseph Williams Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 1:43 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: ARERR 372 in arerror.log Forgot to mention, we are not using Remedy Alert. The alert services is not running. Thanks listers. Joe Williams ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: ARERR 372 in arerror.log
Thanks for replying. I have had api logging turned on. What should I be looking for? Joe W ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: ARERR 372 in arerror.log
Hello Joe, The event is coming from the escalation queue, so that’s the workflow to check first to see what data it is trying to use. I do find it interesting that it lists the field as “SendEMail()” – normally I would expect to see the field id in the parentheses; is it possible this is a field that was used and recently deleted from the form? Kelly Logan, Sr. Systems Administrator (Remedy), GMS ProQuest | 789 E. Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346 | Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA | 734.997.4777 kelly.lo...@proquest.commailto:kelly.lo...@proquest.com www.proquest.com ProQuest...Start here. 2010 InformationWeek 500 Top Innovator P Please consider the environment before printing this email. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender, and delete the message from your computer. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joseph Williams Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 1:24 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: ARERR 372 in arerror.log Hi all, Here are my system details: ARServer 7.5 patch 7 ITSM 7.6.01 Windows NT MS SQL 2005 AR Server Group with 2 servers This is my first time trying the list out. Recently seeing this getting this error message in the arerror.log. 390603 : Could not create alert event (ARERR 372) Thu Sep 08 11:02:15 2011 Wrong number of parameters or bad parameter values specified in function for the field : SendEMail() 390603 is thread. Thanks Joe Williams ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.orghttp://www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.comhttp://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
Re: ARERR 372 in arerror.log
Thanks so much for your response. Deleted a field from what form? Alert Events form? We are currently not using Alert. Thanks Joe ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: ARERR 372 in arerror.log
It’s a good thought but if the AR System was trying to reference a deleted field you would see missing field or field name kind of an error. This is a case of a missing value in the configuration of the Outbound email in the email configuration form.. Joe From: Logan, Kelly Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 1:49 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: ARERR 372 in arerror.log ** Hello Joe, The event is coming from the escalation queue, so that’s the workflow to check first to see what data it is trying to use. I do find it interesting that it lists the field as “SendEMail()” – normally I would expect to see the field id in the parentheses; is it possible this is a field that was used and recently deleted from the form? Kelly Logan, Sr. Systems Administrator (Remedy), GMS ProQuest | 789 E. Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346 | Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA | 734.997.4777 kelly.lo...@proquest.com www.proquest.com ProQuest...Start here. 2010 InformationWeek 500 Top Innovator P Please consider the environment before printing this email. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender, and delete the message from your computer. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joseph Williams Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 1:24 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: ARERR 372 in arerror.log Hi all, Here are my system details: ARServer 7.5 patch 7 ITSM 7.6.01 Windows NT MS SQL 2005 AR Server Group with 2 servers This is my first time trying the list out. Recently seeing this getting this error message in the arerror.log. 390603 : Could not create alert event (ARERR 372) Thu Sep 08 11:02:15 2011 Wrong number of parameters or bad parameter values specified in function for the field : SendEMail() 390603 is thread. Thanks Joe Williams ___ 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_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Server Statistics - Process time ratios
IMHO, Server Statistics are more useful for doing a current system comparison from current state with previously collected statistics and not quite for cross system comparisons like you are looking for. You may get feeds from others with varying values but those values are retrieved from systems that have parameters that are different from yours that could affect those numbers. Apart from just the regular hardware specs, some systems may be dedicated, some not, so what really would be the use of seeing those numbers across different systems? For investigating system meltdowns, your starting point should be your own system. You first rule out specs – whether or not you are short changed on certain things.. you then look at your DB. Then your code (searches, indexes).. Reviewing your own current server state from server statistics while tuning these parameters may help, but I see this more of a management tool for reporting server health than really a tool to provide an insight into what needs to be tuned Joe From: Logan, Kelly Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 1:26 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Server Statistics - Process time ratios ** This is a quick question for other admins that have or are running Server Statistics, particularly on several systems. I am troubleshooting some slowdowns on our ARS 7.1 server, running a heavily customized ITSM 7.0.3. I have started Server Statistics and found the following process time values: Process Time 1/100ths second ARServer Idle Time 16,635,760 API Requests 7,422,478 DB SQL 7,394,727 Entries Calls7,385,638 Get List Entry 7,331,214 Escalation2,194,126 Non DB Restructure36,347 Filter 28,006 Create Entry 23,163 Set Entry 19,428 Delete Entry 1,821 Get Entry Stats 210 Cache Loading 0 FTS 0 Merge Entry 0 I haven’t really looked at these before on a normally functioning system, so I’m throwing it out to those who have: Are these relatively normal ratios compared to other systems you’ve seen; i.e., are API, DB SQL, Entries and Get List process times usually 100x the others’? Thanks for your time! Kelly Logan, Sr. Systems Administrator (Remedy), GMS ProQuest | 789 E. Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346 | Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA | 734.997.4777 kelly.lo...@proquest.com www.proquest.com ProQuest...Start here. 2010 InformationWeek 500 Top Innovator P Please consider the environment before printing this email. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender, and delete the message from your computer. _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
Re: Performance question CTM:People timing
Hi Joe, I got to disagree with you again... but I guess this is what makes this ARS list fun! Pinning a table into memory is not an overkill, it is quite simple to do, you can ask your Oracle DBA. Since the cost of physical memory is lower and lower every year, it is actually more cost-effective to add some more memory to your database server and pin look-up tables, than optimizing the searches to these look-up tables; optimizing the searches will involves one or more of the following: - Possible DBA time to analyze the performance of queries - Remedy Admin/Developer/Consultant time to figure where those sub-optimal searches are being issued from, and modify them - Possible customizations to the ITSM application (which is what everybody is trying to avoid) Pinning a table into memory involves: - Small amount of DBA time to alter the T table to pin it. - Small amount of sys admin to add memory in the database server (this cost is a one time cost) See, when you pin the table in memory, it does NOT matter if your queries are crappy or inefficient, since the table data is in memory; that's the beauty of it! While you are at it, you may as well pin the T table related to the User form. cheers, Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:33 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Yes I agree you would want to avoid pinning a table to memory whose contents are changed continuously by way of modifications or additions.. This would result in frequent memory writes which would beat the purpose of why you choose to pin it to memory in the first place. While the CTM:People table is a good candidate as its contents change less frequently in most standard environments, unless it’s a B2C environment where you maintain your customer base in your CTM:People form, if the table size is as small as 140K, just optimizing searches on it is more than enough, and pinning it to memory is an overkill.. Optimizing searches on this table when records are about that much or even upto half a million, would return the search in less than a fraction of a second anyways.. Joe From: Guillaume Rheaultmailto:guilla...@dcshq.com Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:15 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Joe, well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a large table, you can pin in it memory. Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate. You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the incident form). Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 2:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** For only 140K records I don’t think you need to do anything out of the ordinary to boost up performance. If your statistics were not updated, it does make sense as Oracle didn’t know it had to use indexes and was perhaps attempting table scans assuming the table has no records if the statistics information it had for row count was 0 or thereabouts prior to updating it.. Personally I don’t really think you can consider CTM:People with around 140 K records to be a large object. Its big but not that big enough to be considered to pin to memory.. Joe From: John Sundbergmailto:john.sundb...@kineticdata.com Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:31 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** True... good suggestion. Fundamentally - I was looking for what is normal -- what we were seeing was what we thought was slow. But - just cause you think something is slow - does not mean that it is slow. Sometimes -- you have to look to your neighbors and compare. So - thanks to all that shared their timings and system info. -John On Sep 1, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Guillaume Rheault wrote: ** One more way to make things even faster in Oracle is to pin the underlying T table into memory. Ask the DBA over there to do that -Guilalume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of John Sundberg [john.sundb...@kineticdata.commailto:john.sundb...@kineticdata.com] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 7:25 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_
Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning?
I remember that upgrade! Ahh, the good old days. Jennifer Meyer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:20 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning? David, There was one version, I think when moving from 4 to 4.5 or somewhere thereabouts, where Remedy Engineering accidently used the starting non-reserved range 536,xxx,xxx that messed up some customizations that were done using that starting non reserved field ID's. Since that time my personal preference was never to use that, even if it is a trim field (line, box, text) you are creating.. Until then I happily used that range for those kind of fields. With the introduction of shared workflow, choosing your field ID's became even more important even for some trim fields like text fields.. So my personal preference was to use the 800,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range but I see nothing wrong with starting from 600,xxx,xxx... Choosing this higher number deliberately, you can almost guarantee yourself that an accidental intrusion by BMC Softwares engineers on the 536,xxx,xxx in any future patches or releases will not impact your customization.. There is hardly a chance they would use the 600,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range deliberately.. Cheers Joe -Original Message- From: David Durling Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general 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
Re: Performance question CTM:People timing
I have done this in the past:: pin user (T30 for me) table, this will drop IO to database.. have see this alot.. On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Guillaume Rheault guilla...@dcshq.comwrote: ** Hi Joe, I got to disagree with you again... but I guess this is what makes this ARS list fun! Pinning a table into memory is not an overkill, it is quite simple to do, you can ask your Oracle DBA. Since the cost of physical memory is lower and lower every year, it is actually more cost-effective to add some more memory to your database server and pin look-up tables, than optimizing the searches to these look-up tables; optimizing the searches will involves one or more of the following: - Possible DBA time to analyze the performance of queries - Remedy Admin/Developer/Consultant time to figure where those sub-optimal searches are being issued from, and modify them - Possible customizations to the ITSM application (which is what everybody is trying to avoid) Pinning a table into memory involves: - Small amount of DBA time to alter the T table to pin it. - Small amount of sys admin to add memory in the database server (this cost is a one time cost) See, when you pin the table in memory, it does NOT matter if your queries are crappy or inefficient, since the table data is in memory; that's the beauty of it! While you are at it, you may as well pin the T table related to the User form. cheers, Guillaume -- *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] *Sent:* Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:33 PM *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Yes I agree you would want to avoid pinning a table to memory whose contents are changed continuously by way of modifications or additions.. This would result in frequent memory writes which would beat the purpose of why you choose to pin it to memory in the first place. While the CTM:People table is a good candidate as its contents change less frequently in most standard environments, unless it’s a B2C environment where you maintain your customer base in your CTM:People form, if the table size is as small as 140K, just optimizing searches on it is more than enough, and pinning it to memory is an overkill.. Optimizing searches on this table when records are about that much or even upto half a million, would return the search in less than a fraction of a second anyways.. Joe *From:* Guillaume Rheault guilla...@dcshq.com *Sent:* Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:15 PM *Newsgroups:* public.remedy.arsystem.general *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Joe, well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a large table, you can pin in it memory. Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate. You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the incident form). Guillaume -- *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] *Sent:* Thursday, September 01, 2011 2:19 PM *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** For only 140K records I don’t think you need to do anything out of the ordinary to boost up performance. If your statistics were not updated, it does make sense as Oracle didn’t know it had to use indexes and was perhaps attempting table scans assuming the table has no records if the statistics information it had for row count was 0 or thereabouts prior to updating it.. Personally I don’t really think you can consider CTM:People with around 140 K records to be a large object. Its big but not that big enough to be considered to pin to memory.. Joe *From:* John Sundberg john.sundb...@kineticdata.com *Sent:* Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:31 PM *Newsgroups:* public.remedy.arsystem.general *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** True... good suggestion. Fundamentally - I was looking for what is normal -- what we were seeing was what we thought was slow. But - just cause you think something is slow - does not mean that it is slow. Sometimes -- you have to look to your neighbors and compare. So - thanks to all that shared their timings and system info. -John On Sep 1, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Guillaume Rheault wrote: ** One more way to make things even faster in Oracle is to pin the underlying T table into memory. Ask the DBA over there to do that -Guilalume -- *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of John Sundberg [ john.sundb...@kineticdata.com] *Sent:* Thursday, August 25, 2011
Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning?
Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid.. Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate development server.. Fortunately for them though, they had very few customizations that were lost and were able to redo it within a few days.. And they still didn't bother to invest in a development server after that.. Go figure.. Joe -Original Message- From: Meyer, Jennifer L Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:40 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning? I remember that upgrade! Ahh, the good old days. Jennifer Meyer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:20 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning? David, There was one version, I think when moving from 4 to 4.5 or somewhere thereabouts, where Remedy Engineering accidently used the starting non-reserved range 536,xxx,xxx that messed up some customizations that were done using that starting non reserved field ID's. Since that time my personal preference was never to use that, even if it is a trim field (line, box, text) you are creating.. Until then I happily used that range for those kind of fields. With the introduction of shared workflow, choosing your field ID's became even more important even for some trim fields like text fields.. So my personal preference was to use the 800,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range but I see nothing wrong with starting from 600,xxx,xxx... Choosing this higher number deliberately, you can almost guarantee yourself that an accidental intrusion by BMC Softwares engineers on the 536,xxx,xxx in any future patches or releases will not impact your customization.. There is hardly a chance they would use the 600,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range deliberately.. Cheers Joe -Original Message- From: David Durling Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general 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
Re: Performance question CTM:People timing
Does anybody know if there is a similar option for SQL Server 2008? Regards, Andrew Goodall Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.com http://www.jcp.com/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of patrick zandi Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 1:44 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** I have done this in the past:: pin user (T30 for me) table, this will drop IO to database.. have see this alot.. On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Guillaume Rheault guilla...@dcshq.com wrote: ** Hi Joe, I got to disagree with you again... but I guess this is what makes this ARS list fun! Pinning a table into memory is not an overkill, it is quite simple to do, you can ask your Oracle DBA. Since the cost of physical memory is lower and lower every year, it is actually more cost-effective to add some more memory to your database server and pin look-up tables, than optimizing the searches to these look-up tables; optimizing the searches will involves one or more of the following: - Possible DBA time to analyze the performance of queries - Remedy Admin/Developer/Consultant time to figure where those sub-optimal searches are being issued from, and modify them - Possible customizations to the ITSM application (which is what everybody is trying to avoid) Pinning a table into memory involves: - Small amount of DBA time to alter the T table to pin it. - Small amount of sys admin to add memory in the database server (this cost is a one time cost) See, when you pin the table in memory, it does NOT matter if your queries are crappy or inefficient, since the table data is in memory; that's the beauty of it! While you are at it, you may as well pin the T table related to the User form. cheers, Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:33 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Yes I agree you would want to avoid pinning a table to memory whose contents are changed continuously by way of modifications or additions.. This would result in frequent memory writes which would beat the purpose of why you choose to pin it to memory in the first place. While the CTM:People table is a good candidate as its contents change less frequently in most standard environments, unless it's a B2C environment where you maintain your customer base in your CTM:People form, if the table size is as small as 140K, just optimizing searches on it is more than enough, and pinning it to memory is an overkill.. Optimizing searches on this table when records are about that much or even upto half a million, would return the search in less than a fraction of a second anyways.. Joe From: Guillaume Rheault mailto:guilla...@dcshq.com Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:15 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Joe, well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a large table, you can pin in it memory. Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate. You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the incident form). Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 2:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** For only 140K records I don't think you need to do anything out of the ordinary to boost up performance. If your statistics were not updated, it does make sense as Oracle didn't know it had to use indexes and was perhaps attempting table scans assuming the table has no records if the statistics information it had for row count was 0 or thereabouts prior to updating it.. Personally I don't really think you can consider CTM:People with around 140 K records to be a large object. Its big but not that big enough to be considered to pin to memory.. Joe From: John Sundberg mailto:john.sundb...@kineticdata.com Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:31 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** True... good suggestion. Fundamentally - I was looking for what is normal -- what we were seeing was what we thought was slow. But - just cause you think something is slow - does not mean that it is slow. Sometimes -- you have to look to your neighbors and compare. So - thanks to all that shared their timings and system info.
Re: Performance question CTM:People timing
DBCC PINTABLE Google for it.. search results however may indicate that it might have been discontinued after SQL 2005. I do not have a ready test instance to try it on.. Joe From: Andrew C Goodall Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:12 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Does anybody know if there is a similar option for SQL Server 2008? Regards, Andrew Goodall Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.com From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of patrick zandi Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 1:44 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** I have done this in the past:: pin user (T30 for me) table, this will drop IO to database.. have see this alot.. On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Guillaume Rheault guilla...@dcshq.com wrote: ** Hi Joe, I got to disagree with you again... but I guess this is what makes this ARS list fun! Pinning a table into memory is not an overkill, it is quite simple to do, you can ask your Oracle DBA. Since the cost of physical memory is lower and lower every year, it is actually more cost-effective to add some more memory to your database server and pin look-up tables, than optimizing the searches to these look-up tables; optimizing the searches will involves one or more of the following: - Possible DBA time to analyze the performance of queries - Remedy Admin/Developer/Consultant time to figure where those sub-optimal searches are being issued from, and modify them - Possible customizations to the ITSM application (which is what everybody is trying to avoid) Pinning a table into memory involves: - Small amount of DBA time to alter the T table to pin it. - Small amount of sys admin to add memory in the database server (this cost is a one time cost) See, when you pin the table in memory, it does NOT matter if your queries are crappy or inefficient, since the table data is in memory; that's the beauty of it! While you are at it, you may as well pin the T table related to the User form. cheers, Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:33 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Yes I agree you would want to avoid pinning a table to memory whose contents are changed continuously by way of modifications or additions.. This would result in frequent memory writes which would beat the purpose of why you choose to pin it to memory in the first place. While the CTM:People table is a good candidate as its contents change less frequently in most standard environments, unless it’s a B2C environment where you maintain your customer base in your CTM:People form, if the table size is as small as 140K, just optimizing searches on it is more than enough, and pinning it to memory is an overkill.. Optimizing searches on this table when records are about that much or even upto half a million, would return the search in less than a fraction of a second anyways.. Joe From: Guillaume Rheault Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:15 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Joe, well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a large table, you can pin in it memory. Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate. You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the incident form). Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 2:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** For only 140K records I don’t think you need to do anything out of the ordinary to boost up performance. If your statistics were not updated, it does make sense as Oracle didn’t know it had to use indexes and was perhaps attempting table scans assuming the table has no records if the statistics information it had for row count was 0 or thereabouts prior to updating it.. Personally I don’t really think you can consider CTM:People with around 140 K records to be a large object. Its big but not that big enough to be considered to pin to memory.. Joe From: John Sundberg Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:31 PM Newsgroups:
Re: Performance question CTM:People timing
Just did - I see that utility was bad and was taken out for sql server - http://ask.sqlservercentral.com/questions/15490/is-there-a-way-to-force- a-table-into-memory Regards, Andrew Goodall Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.com http://www.jcp.com/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:17 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing DBCC PINTABLE Google for it.. search results however may indicate that it might have been discontinued after SQL 2005. I do not have a ready test instance to try it on.. Joe From: Andrew C Goodall mailto:ago...@jcpenney.com Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:12 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Does anybody know if there is a similar option for SQL Server 2008? Regards, Andrew Goodall Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.com http://www.jcp.com/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of patrick zandi Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 1:44 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** I have done this in the past:: pin user (T30 for me) table, this will drop IO to database.. have see this alot.. On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Guillaume Rheault guilla...@dcshq.com wrote: ** Hi Joe, I got to disagree with you again... but I guess this is what makes this ARS list fun! Pinning a table into memory is not an overkill, it is quite simple to do, you can ask your Oracle DBA. Since the cost of physical memory is lower and lower every year, it is actually more cost-effective to add some more memory to your database server and pin look-up tables, than optimizing the searches to these look-up tables; optimizing the searches will involves one or more of the following: - Possible DBA time to analyze the performance of queries - Remedy Admin/Developer/Consultant time to figure where those sub-optimal searches are being issued from, and modify them - Possible customizations to the ITSM application (which is what everybody is trying to avoid) Pinning a table into memory involves: - Small amount of DBA time to alter the T table to pin it. - Small amount of sys admin to add memory in the database server (this cost is a one time cost) See, when you pin the table in memory, it does NOT matter if your queries are crappy or inefficient, since the table data is in memory; that's the beauty of it! While you are at it, you may as well pin the T table related to the User form. cheers, Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:33 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Yes I agree you would want to avoid pinning a table to memory whose contents are changed continuously by way of modifications or additions.. This would result in frequent memory writes which would beat the purpose of why you choose to pin it to memory in the first place. While the CTM:People table is a good candidate as its contents change less frequently in most standard environments, unless it's a B2C environment where you maintain your customer base in your CTM:People form, if the table size is as small as 140K, just optimizing searches on it is more than enough, and pinning it to memory is an overkill.. Optimizing searches on this table when records are about that much or even upto half a million, would return the search in less than a fraction of a second anyways.. Joe From: Guillaume Rheault mailto:guilla...@dcshq.com Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:15 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Joe, well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a large table, you can pin in it memory. Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate. You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the incident form). Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 2:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** For only 140K records I don't think you need to do anything out of the ordinary to boost up performance. If your statistics were not updated, it does make sense as Oracle
Re: Performance question CTM:People timing
How would pinning a table impact tables that may have a frequent update? For eg lets say in a case where your customer information that is created and updated frequently on a daily basis, is stored in the People form, and is accessed when creating and updating incident records for them? My understanding when you pin objects to memory, the read is not a frequent read. I do not know at what intervals the memory is updated or if it is updated as soon as there is a change on that object. Anybody with knowledge of that? If the read is as frequent as an update or an insert, what impact would that have on pinning it to the database? Joe From: patrick zandi Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:44 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** I have done this in the past:: pin user (T30 for me) table, this will drop IO to database.. have see this alot.. On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Guillaume Rheault guilla...@dcshq.com wrote: ** Hi Joe, I got to disagree with you again... but I guess this is what makes this ARS list fun! Pinning a table into memory is not an overkill, it is quite simple to do, you can ask your Oracle DBA. Since the cost of physical memory is lower and lower every year, it is actually more cost-effective to add some more memory to your database server and pin look-up tables, than optimizing the searches to these look-up tables; optimizing the searches will involves one or more of the following: - Possible DBA time to analyze the performance of queries - Remedy Admin/Developer/Consultant time to figure where those sub-optimal searches are being issued from, and modify them - Possible customizations to the ITSM application (which is what everybody is trying to avoid) Pinning a table into memory involves: - Small amount of DBA time to alter the T table to pin it. - Small amount of sys admin to add memory in the database server (this cost is a one time cost) See, when you pin the table in memory, it does NOT matter if your queries are crappy or inefficient, since the table data is in memory; that's the beauty of it! While you are at it, you may as well pin the T table related to the User form. cheers, Guillaume -- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:33 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Yes I agree you would want to avoid pinning a table to memory whose contents are changed continuously by way of modifications or additions.. This would result in frequent memory writes which would beat the purpose of why you choose to pin it to memory in the first place. While the CTM:People table is a good candidate as its contents change less frequently in most standard environments, unless it’s a B2C environment where you maintain your customer base in your CTM:People form, if the table size is as small as 140K, just optimizing searches on it is more than enough, and pinning it to memory is an overkill.. Optimizing searches on this table when records are about that much or even upto half a million, would return the search in less than a fraction of a second anyways.. Joe From: Guillaume Rheault Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:15 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Joe, well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a large table, you can pin in it memory. Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate. You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the incident form). Guillaume -- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 2:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** For only 140K records I don’t think you need to do anything out of the ordinary to boost up performance. If your statistics were not updated, it does make sense as Oracle didn’t know it had to use indexes and was perhaps attempting table scans assuming the table has no records if the statistics information it had for row count was 0 or thereabouts prior to updating it.. Personally I don’t really think you can consider CTM:People with around 140 K records to be a large object. Its big but not that big enough to be considered to pin to memory.. Joe From: John Sundberg Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:31 PM
Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning?
This topic also reminded me of a discussion about field ranges used by ITSM and some 3rd party vendors. The post is a little old - from 2008, but there are some ranges listed by Christopher Strauss in the thread subject Reserved Field Id Range for v 7.0.01. Thanks, everybody - David David Durling University of Georgia From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM 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 60001 298 Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998 Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 60002 2998 Views 60010 N/A Groups 120 129 9 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.commailto:suzanpal...@gmail.com wrote: ** David, Personally I'd stay out of the less than 6 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.edumailto:durl...@uga.edu wrote: ** Thanks Mike Susan, So it sounds like the 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any special use. Rather, it's just that 600xx-9 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 6). 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.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike) Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 10:07 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto: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.commailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com Office 813.978.2192tel:813.978.2192 From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG]mailto:[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Susan Palmer Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:53 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning? ** I want to know who is going to use more fields than range 6 through 9 can provide! Even for BMC that might be a challenge. Since we're a
Re: Performance question CTM:People timing
Love these kind of discussions too :-) I completely agree with the cost effectiveness side of the argument in terms of time money.. However while building applications, it does not really cost you that much extra time when you are designing a data schema, to build indexes on columns you think you would need indexes for. When building a data schema, you already know way before you build it, what fields your queries are going to be centered around. Usually it’s a pretty finite list that rarely goes beyond 10 to 15 fields even if you have over 100 columns of data on that form. Yes you may have problems when and if the queries your schema requires, require you to exceed the number of allowable indexes on a schema, which is 32 I think for Oracle and a little higher for MS-SQL (I don’t know the exact number).. The AR System however to the best of my knowledge has a much lower limit – is it 16 or 24??? For all practical purposes however this number is significantly sufficient. Pinning tables is a great fix for a poorly designed / developed application where the developer has not considered performance while developing it and built search related functionality with no consideration for performance, which is causing a meltdown of that application in terms of performance. For the latest version of the ITSM application, I don’t think I found any such holes where indexes are missing where there should have been one on the CTM:People but don’t hold me to that as I have not had any performance related problems with that table recently so didn’t really have the need to analyze that table recently.. The earliest build of ITSM which was known as ITSP was another story. There were like 4 out of the box indexes on that form but about 8 to 10 more candidates for indexes... Joe From: Guillaume Rheault Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:36 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Hi Joe, I got to disagree with you again... but I guess this is what makes this ARS list fun! Pinning a table into memory is not an overkill, it is quite simple to do, you can ask your Oracle DBA. Since the cost of physical memory is lower and lower every year, it is actually more cost-effective to add some more memory to your database server and pin look-up tables, than optimizing the searches to these look-up tables; optimizing the searches will involves one or more of the following: - Possible DBA time to analyze the performance of queries - Remedy Admin/Developer/Consultant time to figure where those sub-optimal searches are being issued from, and modify them - Possible customizations to the ITSM application (which is what everybody is trying to avoid) Pinning a table into memory involves: - Small amount of DBA time to alter the T table to pin it. - Small amount of sys admin to add memory in the database server (this cost is a one time cost) See, when you pin the table in memory, it does NOT matter if your queries are crappy or inefficient, since the table data is in memory; that's the beauty of it! While you are at it, you may as well pin the T table related to the User form. cheers, Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:33 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Yes I agree you would want to avoid pinning a table to memory whose contents are changed continuously by way of modifications or additions.. This would result in frequent memory writes which would beat the purpose of why you choose to pin it to memory in the first place. While the CTM:People table is a good candidate as its contents change less frequently in most standard environments, unless it’s a B2C environment where you maintain your customer base in your CTM:People form, if the table size is as small as 140K, just optimizing searches on it is more than enough, and pinning it to memory is an overkill.. Optimizing searches on this table when records are about that much or even upto half a million, would return the search in less than a fraction of a second anyways.. Joe From: Guillaume Rheault Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:15 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Joe, well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a large table, you can pin in it memory. Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate. You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the incident form). Guillaume
Re: Performance question CTM:People timing
If my memory serves me right, the ability to pin tables in memory was introduced in Oracle 8.0.6, so it's been a while back (more than 10 years ago). With each new database version, this feature has matured, the internals of this feature have changed and matured. But this feature is very solid, very mature and works. You may either google your specific questions or ask a knowledgeable DBA, or somebody that knows all the internals of it. I don't worry about the internals, I only know that it works, by looking at the execution plans and how fast the data is provided. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:22 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** How would pinning a table impact tables that may have a frequent update? For eg lets say in a case where your customer information that is created and updated frequently on a daily basis, is stored in the People form, and is accessed when creating and updating incident records for them? My understanding when you pin objects to memory, the read is not a frequent read. I do not know at what intervals the memory is updated or if it is updated as soon as there is a change on that object. Anybody with knowledge of that? If the read is as frequent as an update or an insert, what impact would that have on pinning it to the database? Joe From: patrick zandimailto:remedy...@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:44 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** I have done this in the past:: pin user (T30 for me) table, this will drop IO to database.. have see this alot.. On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Guillaume Rheault guilla...@dcshq.commailto:guilla...@dcshq.com wrote: ** Hi Joe, I got to disagree with you again... but I guess this is what makes this ARS list fun! Pinning a table into memory is not an overkill, it is quite simple to do, you can ask your Oracle DBA. Since the cost of physical memory is lower and lower every year, it is actually more cost-effective to add some more memory to your database server and pin look-up tables, than optimizing the searches to these look-up tables; optimizing the searches will involves one or more of the following: - Possible DBA time to analyze the performance of queries - Remedy Admin/Developer/Consultant time to figure where those sub-optimal searches are being issued from, and modify them - Possible customizations to the ITSM application (which is what everybody is trying to avoid) Pinning a table into memory involves: - Small amount of DBA time to alter the T table to pin it. - Small amount of sys admin to add memory in the database server (this cost is a one time cost) See, when you pin the table in memory, it does NOT matter if your queries are crappy or inefficient, since the table data is in memory; that's the beauty of it! While you are at it, you may as well pin the T table related to the User form. cheers, Guillaume From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza [jdso...@shyle.netmailto:jdso...@shyle.net] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:33 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Yes I agree you would want to avoid pinning a table to memory whose contents are changed continuously by way of modifications or additions.. This would result in frequent memory writes which would beat the purpose of why you choose to pin it to memory in the first place. While the CTM:People table is a good candidate as its contents change less frequently in most standard environments, unless it’s a B2C environment where you maintain your customer base in your CTM:People form, if the table size is as small as 140K, just optimizing searches on it is more than enough, and pinning it to memory is an overkill.. Optimizing searches on this table when records are about that much or even upto half a million, would return the search in less than a fraction of a second anyways.. Joe From: Guillaume Rheaultmailto:guilla...@dcshq.com Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:15 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing ** Joe, well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a large table, you can pin in it memory. Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate. You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the incident form). Guillaume From:
Re: Group List Field in User Form
Are you setting the password as well? If you are leaving it blank it might throw up that error. Shafqat Ayaz From: Pramod vaidya.pra...@gmail.com To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2011 8:01 AM Subject: Group List Field in User Form ** Hi List, If we are pushing values on User form to create New User. In a push field action if we map multiple groups to Group List field why AR server throws Authentication Failed Error? -- Pramod _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
Consuming Web Service with Client Certificate and Server Certificate
We are running Remedy 7.6.04 on a Red Hat Linux platform with the latest java and have need to consume an external web service that is written in .net. The external server needs a server certificate to allow our machines to talk, this is working. The .net application then wants a client certificate to come over to allow access to the application. From what we can tell, both certificates are cleared via the certificate authority, but the client certificate does not appear to be passed or something. Unfortunately once the server certificate goes, the connection is buried in ssl and we cannot get a clean trace to see if there is an error with the client certificate. The Remedy error message we get back is 403 Forbidden. We have written some code in .net on our side to prove that a connection with this client certificate is possible, but to get that to work we had to define the certificate as X509_Certificate2. Has anyone had any luck getting remedy on linux to talk to an external web service using this type of client certificate and a server certificate? This is becoming urgent. Thanks Bob Ellington (RSP) bob.elling...@gmail.com ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Group List Field in User Form
yes i am leaving password blank. let me check by setting password. Thanks, Pramod On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:00 AM, Shafqat Ayaz shafq...@yahoo.com wrote: ** Are you setting the password as well? If you are leaving it blank it might throw up that error. * Shafqat Ayaz* -- *From:* Pramod vaidya.pra...@gmail.com *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Sent:* Thursday, September 8, 2011 8:01 AM *Subject:* Group List Field in User Form ** Hi List, If we are pushing values on User form to create New User. In a push field action if we map multiple groups to Group List field why AR server throws Authentication Failed Error? -- Pramod _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ -- Pramod ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Auto Reply: Re: Group List Field in User Form
This is an auto-replied message. I am currently out of office with limited access to email. I will be returning on Monday 9/12/2011, please contact Kim Santana or Mike Flynn if this is an emergency. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Outside of Reserved Range warning?
Nice find! I hadn't read that one. It is nice to have a list. Just to add to it... My eService uses for Virtual Chat (v7.1): 173 179 1005 1575 1576 1577 11107 1842067 300 80005000 200xx 240xx 260xx 301xx 302xx 301xx 536xx 800xx - 825xx (the majority) 800xx 1000xx Maybe we should start using 858xx, our area code? I guess one thing to keep in mind is that while not ideal it would most likely be OK to overlap with a 3rd party's range. You would only encounter issues on the forms where the two apps integrate, if they do. Jason Hey! Who turned out the lights? From San Diego, CA. On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:25 PM, David Durling durl...@uga.edu wrote: ** This topic also reminded me of a discussion about field ranges used by ITSM and some 3rd party vendors. The post is a little old – from 2008, but there are some ranges listed by Christopher Strauss in the thread subject “Reserved Field Id Range for v 7.0.01”. ** ** Thanks, everybody - ** ** David ** ** David Durling University of Georgia ** ** *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Jason Miller *Sent:* Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM *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 60001 298 Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998 Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 60002 2998 Views 60010 N/A Groups 120 129 9 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 6 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 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any special use. Rather, it’s just that 600xx-9 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 6). 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
