Re: Incident Last Updated

2018-05-30 Thread Brian Pancia
So I built out all the functionality on our dev box using an escalation to 
start.  I was expecting to see the Last Modified By to be AR_ESCALATOR and the 
Last Modified Date to be the date the work log entry was created.  The update 
was immediate when adding a work log entry from the Incident Management 
Console, which was odd since I set the escalation to run in 5 min intervals.  I 
opened the ticket and the Last Modified By was the user I used to submit the 
work log entry.  I tried with a user account that only had read access to see 
if it would throw any errors.  I then tried in production with none of the code 
transferred over and everything worked as intended.


I know there was some challenges in the past with the ITSM Suite especially 
when SRM came around.  There were a lot of kinks to work out with allowing any 
user to submit, submitter mode lock, and licensing.  People developed many 
workarounds to essentially by pass the errors BMC/Remedy would pop up on the 
screen to force licensing.  This and permissions was always a challenge when 
you start looking at row level access.  Hence the addition of additional 
permission fields and parent groups.


I don't think 7.6.04 had the updates to the Last Modified fields like described 
above.  It's been a while so I may be off on the version.  8.x I didn't mess 
around with so I'm not sure if it might have been updated in that version or 
9.x.  I haven't dug into how the system is updating the field on the backend.  
However, it is not traditional workflow that is updating the fields.


Brian


From: ARSList  on behalf of Jason Miller 

Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 1:52:52 PM
To: ARSList
Subject: Re: Incident Last Updated

Wonderful! Do you mind expanding a little on what you found?

Jason

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Brian Pancia 
mailto:panc...@finityit.com>> wrote:

I did some testing with this and who knew it's already built into the system.  
We're running 9.1.04.  Not sure when this functionality was added in.  Probably 
20 versions ago.  Just shows sometimes our minds get stuck on how the system 
worked many versions ago and we assume it's never been changed.  Ok, maybe that 
is just my old mind.


Brian


DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments 
contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally 
privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance upon the contents of 
the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
information in error, please delete it immediately.

--
ARSList mailing list
ARSList@arslist.org<mailto:ARSList@arslist.org>
https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist


DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments 
contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally 
privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance upon the contents of 
the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
information in error, please delete it immediately.
-- 
ARSList mailing list
ARSList@arslist.org
https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist


Re: Incident Last Updated

2018-05-30 Thread Jason Miller
Wonderful! Do you mind expanding a little on what you found?

Jason

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Brian Pancia  wrote:

> I did some testing with this and who knew it's already built into the
> system.  We're running 9.1.04.  Not sure when this functionality was added
> in.  Probably 20 versions ago.  Just shows sometimes our minds get stuck
> on how the system worked many versions ago and we assume it's never been
> changed.  Ok, maybe that is just my old mind.
>
>
> Brian
>
>
> DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments
> contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally
> privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the
> recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance
> upon the contents of the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this information in error, please delete it immediately.
>
> --
> ARSList mailing list
> ARSList@arslist.org
> https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist
>
>
-- 
ARSList mailing list
ARSList@arslist.org
https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist


Re: Incident Last Updated

2018-05-30 Thread Jason Miller
Ah, I see where you are going. Would non-licensed people other than the
requester add work log entries? The requester should be able to update
their own request (unless less the "you do not have write permissions"
workflow in ITSM prevents this). I personally I view adding/modifying a
work log entry and not updating the last modified timestamp/user on the
main record as a flaw. The context of the main request was updated and the
date/user stamps should reflect this (and is why in my custom app I made
sure it did).

One thing regarding porting SQL code between environments.. I brought this
up on the list years ago when I was researching any potential performance
issues... What I have done in the past is create a second utility DB next
to ARSystem on the same DB server. Here is where all of our custom views,
stored procs, jobs, etc. lived. This left ARsystem purely manged by Remedy
and anything we created directly in SQL went in to the utility DB. All of
these custom SQL objects were coded to use the appropriate resources
(linked servers, etc) for that environment (ex: our QA utility DB
references other QA systems we were integrated with). By doing this,
assuming our custom SQL objects were using the automatically-generated view
names or our DBs were so in sync the schemeIds matched, we just refreshed
the lower level environment DBs with a copy of prod and only had to do our
normal ARSystem/ITSM environment updates (using the Remedy Restore Tool
when were on ITSM). All of our customs SQL just worked after a DB refresh.

Jason

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Brian Pancia  wrote:

> Jason,
>
>
> Great stuff.
>
>
> The license issues come in because you can have customers submit work log
> updates without a write license.  I believe SRM is setup that way or at
> least us to be if I'm not mistaken, so this would make a filter update a
> problem.  If I went the escalation route I would setup a qualification to
> say only update the last modified date if the work log submit date is newer
> than the incident last modified date.  For now we don't have customers
> adding work log entries, but we may down the road.  Not sure if we would at
> that time say date last updated by support versus date last updated by
> customer.
>
>
> The challenge with the SQL route is going across various environments when
> porting code over (dev, test, prod).  The SQL code may or may not have to
> be redone.  We have multiple environments and multiple networks utilizing
> remedy.  I do like direct SQL because a lot of times it is much faster
> depending on what you are doing.
>
>
> I'm going to play around with a few of these in our dev environment and
> figure out which one works the best.
>
>
> Brian
>
>
> --
> *From:* ARSList  on behalf of Jason Miller <
> jason.mil...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 29, 2018 3:39:08 PM
>
> *To:* ARSList
> *Subject:* Re: Incident Last Updated
>
> What kind of licensing issues are you thinking of? I probably would not
> create workflow around forcing an updated. That is a procedural issue, not
> a system issue (a common desire is to manage people via tech).
>
> I haven't researched if this would have a negative affect in ITSM, but at
> my last job we built our own incident management and change management apps
> and I made sure to include a filter that would update the main ticket any
> time an associated work log records was created/updated so there wasn't a
> situation where the last modified date was older on the main ticket than a
> work log entry. These apps had the same basic structure as ITSM where
> there was a main record and related work log records (although audit and
> work log were all recorded in the same form so you could see the full life
> cycle of the ticket by looking at one table field / report). You want to
> consider this route if want simply look at the last modified date on the
> main record (assuming it wouldn't be updated by an escalation giving a
> false update).
>
> Another thought is to have a SQL job that updates your custom field for
> capturing last user modified date. It would be pretty quick performance
> wise and wouldn't touch the core last modified by and last modified date
> fields. By doing this then you can add the custom field to consoles like
> you mention and allow for sorting by this value. Or you could use a
> combination of this custom field that captures only user update times with
> workflow on the work log record as mentioned in the last paragraph, many
> options here.
>
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 1:57 PM, Brian Pancia 
> wrote:
>
> Jason - Thanks I was looking at that as a potential option too.  Of course
> the challenge with the work logs is licensing related issues.  I definitely
> want to make

Re: Incident Last Updated

2018-05-30 Thread Brian Pancia
I did some testing with this and who knew it's already built into the system.  
We're running 9.1.04.  Not sure when this functionality was added in.  Probably 
20 versions ago.  Just shows sometimes our minds get stuck on how the system 
worked many versions ago and we assume it's never been changed.  Ok, maybe that 
is just my old mind.


Brian


DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments 
contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally 
privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance upon the contents of 
the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
information in error, please delete it immediately.
-- 
ARSList mailing list
ARSList@arslist.org
https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist


Re: Incident Last Updated

2018-05-29 Thread Brian Pancia
Jason,


Great stuff.


The license issues come in because you can have customers submit work log 
updates without a write license.  I believe SRM is setup that way or at least 
us to be if I'm not mistaken, so this would make a filter update a problem.  If 
I went the escalation route I would setup a qualification to say only update 
the last modified date if the work log submit date is newer than the incident 
last modified date.  For now we don't have customers adding work log entries, 
but we may down the road.  Not sure if we would at that time say date last 
updated by support versus date last updated by customer.


The challenge with the SQL route is going across various environments when 
porting code over (dev, test, prod).  The SQL code may or may not have to be 
redone.  We have multiple environments and multiple networks utilizing remedy.  
I do like direct SQL because a lot of times it is much faster depending on what 
you are doing.


I'm going to play around with a few of these in our dev environment and figure 
out which one works the best.


Brian



From: ARSList  on behalf of Jason Miller 

Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2018 3:39:08 PM
To: ARSList
Subject: Re: Incident Last Updated

What kind of licensing issues are you thinking of? I probably would not create 
workflow around forcing an updated. That is a procedural issue, not a system 
issue (a common desire is to manage people via tech).

I haven't researched if this would have a negative affect in ITSM, but at my 
last job we built our own incident management and change management apps and I 
made sure to include a filter that would update the main ticket any time an 
associated work log records was created/updated so there wasn't a situation 
where the last modified date was older on the main ticket than a work log 
entry. These apps had the same basic structure as ITSM where there was a main 
record and related work log records (although audit and work log were all 
recorded in the same form so you could see the full life cycle of the ticket by 
looking at one table field / report). You want to consider this route if want 
simply look at the last modified date on the main record (assuming it wouldn't 
be updated by an escalation giving a false update).

Another thought is to have a SQL job that updates your custom field for 
capturing last user modified date. It would be pretty quick performance wise 
and wouldn't touch the core last modified by and last modified date fields. By 
doing this then you can add the custom field to consoles like you mention and 
allow for sorting by this value. Or you could use a combination of this custom 
field that captures only user update times with workflow on the work log record 
as mentioned in the last paragraph, many options here.

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 1:57 PM, Brian Pancia 
mailto:panc...@finityit.com>> wrote:

Jason - Thanks I was looking at that as a potential option too.  Of course the 
challenge with the work logs is licensing related issues.  I definitely want to 
make sure I don't kill all the functionality designed around the work logs with 
workflow forcing updates.  One thing I was looking at for the escalation route 
is so the users can see quickly the last time the ticket was updated, which can 
be used in the out of box consoles easily.  I may be able to use a display only 
field for that and do a join for backend reporting though.


Brian



From: ARSList mailto:arslist-boun...@arslist.org>> 
on behalf of Jason Miller 
mailto:jason.mil...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2018 1:55:52 PM
To: ARSList
Subject: Re: Incident Last Updated

I have seen these type of reports written against a join of HPD:WorkLog and 
HPD:HelpDesk. This way you do not need to modify any data (and in-turn you 
don't update the last modified date) like you would with an escalation.

Jason

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Brian Pancia 
mailto:panc...@finityit.com>> wrote:

I'm looking at including the last date a ticket was updated either directly or 
through a work log entry.  My initial thought is to create an escalation that 
checks to see if the work log entry submit date is greater than the ticket last 
modified date and then update the ticket with that date and user in the last 
modified fields.  The goal is to be able to easily report on how many days 
since the ticket was updated.  I'm sure this has come up 1000 times.  Has 
anyone come up with other cool alternative methods?


Thanks,


Brian


DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments 
contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally 
privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance upon the contents of 
the information transmitted is strictly

Re: Incident Last Updated

2018-05-29 Thread Jason Miller
What kind of licensing issues are you thinking of? I probably would not
create workflow around forcing an updated. That is a procedural issue, not
a system issue (a common desire is to manage people via tech).

I haven't researched if this would have a negative affect in ITSM, but at
my last job we built our own incident management and change management apps
and I made sure to include a filter that would update the main ticket any
time an associated work log records was created/updated so there wasn't a
situation where the last modified date was older on the main ticket than a
work log entry. These apps had the same basic structure as ITSM where there
was a main record and related work log records (although audit and work log
were all recorded in the same form so you could see the full life cycle of
the ticket by looking at one table field / report). You want to consider
this route if want simply look at the last modified date on the main record
(assuming it wouldn't be updated by an escalation giving a false update).

Another thought is to have a SQL job that updates your custom field for
capturing last user modified date. It would be pretty quick performance
wise and wouldn't touch the core last modified by and last modified date
fields. By doing this then you can add the custom field to consoles like
you mention and allow for sorting by this value. Or you could use a
combination of this custom field that captures only user update times with
workflow on the work log record as mentioned in the last paragraph, many
options here.

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 1:57 PM, Brian Pancia  wrote:

> Jason - Thanks I was looking at that as a potential option too.  Of course
> the challenge with the work logs is licensing related issues.  I definitely
> want to make sure I don't kill all the functionality designed around the
> work logs with workflow forcing updates.  One thing I was looking at for
> the escalation route is so the users can see quickly the last time the
> ticket was updated, which can be used in the out of box consoles easily.  I
> may be able to use a display only field for that and do a join for backend
> reporting though.
>
>
> Brian
>
>
> --
> *From:* ARSList  on behalf of Jason Miller <
> jason.mil...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 29, 2018 1:55:52 PM
> *To:* ARSList
> *Subject:* Re: Incident Last Updated
>
> I have seen these type of reports written against a join of HPD:WorkLog
> and HPD:HelpDesk. This way you do not need to modify any data (and in-turn
> you don't update the last modified date) like you would with an escalation.
>
> Jason
>
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Brian Pancia 
> wrote:
>
> I'm looking at including the last date a ticket was updated either
> directly or through a work log entry.  My initial thought is to create an
> escalation that checks to see if the work log entry submit date is greater
> than the ticket last modified date and then update the ticket with that
> date and user in the last modified fields.  The goal is to be able to
> easily report on how many days since the ticket was updated.  I'm sure this
> has come up 1000 times.  Has anyone come up with other cool alternative
> methods?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Brian
>
>
> DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments
> contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally
> privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the
> recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance
> upon the contents of the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this information in error, please delete it immediately.
>
> --
> ARSList mailing list
> ARSList@arslist.org
> https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist
>
>
> DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments
> contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally
> privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the
> recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance
> upon the contents of the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this information in error, please delete it immediately.
>
> --
> ARSList mailing list
> ARSList@arslist.org
> https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist
>
>
-- 
ARSList mailing list
ARSList@arslist.org
https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist


Re: Incident Last Updated

2018-05-29 Thread Brian Pancia
Jason - Thanks I was looking at that as a potential option too.  Of course the 
challenge with the work logs is licensing related issues.  I definitely want to 
make sure I don't kill all the functionality designed around the work logs with 
workflow forcing updates.  One thing I was looking at for the escalation route 
is so the users can see quickly the last time the ticket was updated, which can 
be used in the out of box consoles easily.  I may be able to use a display only 
field for that and do a join for backend reporting though.


Brian



From: ARSList  on behalf of Jason Miller 

Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2018 1:55:52 PM
To: ARSList
Subject: Re: Incident Last Updated

I have seen these type of reports written against a join of HPD:WorkLog and 
HPD:HelpDesk. This way you do not need to modify any data (and in-turn you 
don't update the last modified date) like you would with an escalation.

Jason

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Brian Pancia 
mailto:panc...@finityit.com>> wrote:

I'm looking at including the last date a ticket was updated either directly or 
through a work log entry.  My initial thought is to create an escalation that 
checks to see if the work log entry submit date is greater than the ticket last 
modified date and then update the ticket with that date and user in the last 
modified fields.  The goal is to be able to easily report on how many days 
since the ticket was updated.  I'm sure this has come up 1000 times.  Has 
anyone come up with other cool alternative methods?


Thanks,


Brian


DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments 
contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally 
privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance upon the contents of 
the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
information in error, please delete it immediately.

--
ARSList mailing list
ARSList@arslist.org<mailto:ARSList@arslist.org>
https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist


DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments 
contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally 
privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance upon the contents of 
the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
information in error, please delete it immediately.
-- 
ARSList mailing list
ARSList@arslist.org
https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist


Re: Incident Last Updated

2018-05-29 Thread Jason Miller
I have seen these type of reports written against a join of HPD:WorkLog and
HPD:HelpDesk. This way you do not need to modify any data (and in-turn you
don't update the last modified date) like you would with an escalation.

Jason

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Brian Pancia  wrote:

> I'm looking at including the last date a ticket was updated either
> directly or through a work log entry.  My initial thought is to create an
> escalation that checks to see if the work log entry submit date is greater
> than the ticket last modified date and then update the ticket with that
> date and user in the last modified fields.  The goal is to be able to
> easily report on how many days since the ticket was updated.  I'm sure this
> has come up 1000 times.  Has anyone come up with other cool alternative
> methods?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Brian
>
>
> DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments
> contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally
> privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the
> recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance
> upon the contents of the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this information in error, please delete it immediately.
>
> --
> ARSList mailing list
> ARSList@arslist.org
> https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist
>
>
-- 
ARSList mailing list
ARSList@arslist.org
https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist