Table Field Qualification
Hello Everyone One more for the week. I have two regular forms A and B. Form A has four database fields, a button and a table field. The source for the table field is Form B. On Form A, when the user enters values in the data fields and clicks the button, I want the values to populate on the table field. My approach for this so far is an active link on the button with push fields action and a change field action. But my table reads all the values from Form B. How do I get the table read values only to the current request. Environment: ARS 7, SQL Server 2005, Home Grown App. Thanks in advance Mike ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Table Field qualification
Hello Everyone
I hope somebody can answer this…
I have a form with the following fields
LOCATION - A character field with a menu append
POSITION - A character field with a menu append
TABLE - A table field whose source form is a JOIN form of employee
location and employee position. This table gets refreshed and fetches the
data based on the user selection of LOCATION and POSITION.
Table qualification is (( 'LOCATION' = $LOCATION$) AND ('POSITION' =
$POSITION$))
Now when the menu is appended and I have multiple values in the LOCATION
and POSITION fields, how would I set the table qualification ?
I am guessing it can be done using some External qualification but not
sure how ?
Thanks in advance for your time
Gere
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
Table Field Qualification
I am attempting to add a table field to our Home Page and I having difficulty with the qualification statement. What I am trying to do is this: Show all tickets that have been assigned to 'Assigned Group' "XXX" with the 'Status' of "Resolved" for 5 or more days. I am able to perform this search in the user tool using the '*Status-History.Resolved.TIME' field. The problem is this not an option in the admin tool on the qualification statement. If I try to type that into the Qualification statement, after I save automatically changes it to '*Status-History.New.TIME'. If anyone has an idea I will try anything at this point. Thanks, Andy L. Mayfield System Operation Specialist Alabama Power Company Office: 8-226-1805 ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Table Field Qualification
Hello all. AR Server 6.03 Helpdesk App 6.0 Having trouble with a Qualification: I'm trying to create a table on my support form that only shows Unassigned HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that is logged into Remedy User. Any suggestion? ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
Hi Mike, You can reference the fields in your table qualification and make an active link for a button that refreshes the table. HTH, Matthew C. Gayford Technology Research & Development Information Technology Systems Division University of North Carolina Wilmington (910) 962-7177 From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Gere Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 9:12 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table Field Qualification ** Hello Everyone One more for the week. I have two regular forms A and B. Form A has four database fields, a button and a table field. The source for the table field is Form B. On Form A, when the user enters values in the data fields and clicks the button, I want the values to populate on the table field. My approach for this so far is an active link on the button with push fields action and a change field action. But my table reads all the values from Form B. How do I get the table read values only to the current request. Environment: ARS 7, SQL Server 2005, Home Grown App. Thanks in advance Mike __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
A little more info pleas. When the button is clicked, in addition to the Push to form B, does it also save anything in form A, or is Form A just a display form? TP From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Gere Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 9:12 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table Field Qualification ** Hello Everyone One more for the week. I have two regular forms A and B. Form A has four database fields, a button and a table field. The source for the table field is Form B. On Form A, when the user enters values in the data fields and clicks the button, I want the values to populate on the table field. My approach for this so far is an active link on the button with push fields action and a change field action. But my table reads all the values from Form B. How do I get the table read values only to the current request. Environment: ARS 7, SQL Server 2005, Home Grown App. Thanks in advance Mike __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
Hello All, Use external. For example on Form A add a char field of type display only Let say z_Clause. In the table qualification field add External($z_Clause$). With an active link add de condition to field z_Clause then with a change filed refresh the table. Daniel From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Gere Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 3:12 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table Field Qualification ** Hello Everyone One more for the week. I have two regular forms A and B. Form A has four database fields, a button and a table field. The source for the table field is Form B. On Form A, when the user enters values in the data fields and clicks the button, I want the values to populate on the table field. My approach for this so far is an active link on the button with push fields action and a change field action. But my table reads all the values from Form B. How do I get the table read values only to the current request. Environment: ARS 7, SQL Server 2005, Home Grown App. Thanks in advance Mike __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
Form A has to save the records. This form is to make multiple requests. They click on the button and the table field has to refresh, they enter the second request and the table refreshes. The problem that I am having is to populate the table with the current requests. I cant use the 'RequestID' = $RequestID$ since it is not generated until we save the record. On 3/14/08, Timothy Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ** > > A little more info pleas. > > When the button is clicked, in addition to the Push to form B, does it > also save anything in form A, or is Form A just a display form? > > > > TP > > > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Michael Gere > *Sent:* Friday, March 14, 2008 9:12 AM > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Table Field Qualification > > > > ** > > Hello Everyone > > > > One more for the week. I have two regular forms A and B. Form A has four > database fields, a button and a table field. The source for the table field > is Form B. On Form A, when the user enters values in the data fields and > clicks the button, I want the values to populate on the table field. > > > > My approach for this so far is an active link on the button with push > fields action and a change field action. But my table reads all the values > from Form B. How do I get the table read values only to the current > request. > > > > Environment: ARS 7, SQL Server 2005, Home Grown App. > > > > Thanks in advance > > Mike > > __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > html___ > __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > html___ > ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
Mike, There are some examples of table qualifications and using the Keyword EXTERNAL on our website: http://www.buoyantsolutions.net/ARS_Education.html HTH Regards...Gidd _ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Gere Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 6:12 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table Field Qualification ** Hello Everyone One more for the week. I have two regular forms A and B. Form A has four database fields, a button and a table field. The source for the table field is Form B. On Form A, when the user enters values in the data fields and clicks the button, I want the values to populate on the table field. My approach for this so far is an active link on the button with push fields action and a change field action. But my table reads all the values from Form B. How do I get the table read values only to the current request. Environment: ARS 7, SQL Server 2005, Home Grown App. Thanks in advance Mike __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
How about 'RequestID' = $LASTID$ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Gere Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 9:45 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Table Field Qualification ** Form A has to save the records. This form is to make multiple requests. They click on the button and the table field has to refresh, they enter the second request and the table refreshes. The problem that I am having is to populate the table with the current requests. I cant use the 'RequestID' = $RequestID$ since it is not generated until we save the record. On 3/14/08, Timothy Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ** A little more info pleas. When the button is clicked, in addition to the Push to form B, does it also save anything in form A, or is Form A just a display form? TP From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Gere Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 9:12 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table Field Qualification ** Hello Everyone One more for the week. I have two regular forms A and B. Form A has four database fields, a button and a table field. The source for the table field is Form B. On Form A, when the user enters values in the data fields and clicks the button, I want the values to populate on the table field. My approach for this so far is an active link on the button with push fields action and a change field action. But my table reads all the values from Form B. How do I get the table read values only to the current request. Environment: ARS 7, SQL Server 2005, Home Grown App. Thanks in advance Mike __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com <http://www.rmsportal.com/> ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com <http://www.rmsportal.com/> ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
Create fields to generate/hold a GUID. Generate the GUID and push that to form B. Then you can use 'GUID field abc' = $GUID field abc$ TP From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Gere Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 9:45 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Table Field Qualification ** Form A has to save the records. This form is to make multiple requests. They click on the button and the table field has to refresh, they enter the second request and the table refreshes. The problem that I am having is to populate the table with the current requests. I cant use the 'RequestID' = $RequestID$ since it is not generated until we save the record. On 3/14/08, Timothy Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ** A little more info pleas. When the button is clicked, in addition to the Push to form B, does it also save anything in form A, or is Form A just a display form? TP From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Gere Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 9:12 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table Field Qualification ** Hello Everyone One more for the week. I have two regular forms A and B. Form A has four database fields, a button and a table field. The source for the table field is Form B. On Form A, when the user enters values in the data fields and clicks the button, I want the values to populate on the table field. My approach for this so far is an active link on the button with push fields action and a change field action. But my table reads all the values from Form B. How do I get the table read values only to the current request. Environment: ARS 7, SQL Server 2005, Home Grown App. Thanks in advance Mike __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com <http://www.rmsportal.com/> ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com <http://www.rmsportal.com/> ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field qualification
Michael,
Here is a link to Educational Viewlets on our website:
http://www.buoyantsolutions.net/ARS_Education.html
Look for the one using External() Keyword.
HTH
Regards...Gidd
_
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 9:31 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Table Field qualification
**
Hello Everyone
I hope somebody can answer this.
I have a form with the following fields
LOCATION - A character field with a menu append
POSITION - A character field with a menu append
TABLE - A table field whose source form is a JOIN form of employee
location and employee position. This table gets refreshed and fetches the
data based on the user selection of LOCATION and POSITION.
Table qualification is (( 'LOCATION' = $LOCATION$) AND ('POSITION' =
$POSITION$))
Now when the menu is appended and I have multiple values in the LOCATION
and POSITION fields, how would I set the table qualification ?
I am guessing it can be done using some External qualification but not
sure how ?
Thanks in advance for your time
Gere
__20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
Re: Table Field qualification
Why not just change the table qualification to $LOCATION$ LIKE "%" +
'LOCATION' = "%" AND $POSITION$ LIKE "%" + 'POSITION' + "%"
??
Sorry if I'm misunderstanding the issue and oversimplifying it.
Norm
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 11:31 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Table Field qualification
**
Hello Everyone
I hope somebody can answer this...
I have a form with the following fields
LOCATION - A character field with a menu append
POSITION - A character field with a menu append
TABLE - A table field whose source form is a JOIN form of employee
location and employee position. This table gets refreshed and fetches
the
data based on the user selection of LOCATION and POSITION.
Table qualification is (( 'LOCATION' = $LOCATION$) AND ('POSITION' =
$POSITION$))
Now when the menu is appended and I have multiple values in the LOCATION
and POSITION fields, how would I set the table qualification ?
I am guessing it can be done using some External qualification but not
sure how ?
Thanks in advance for your time
Gere
__20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
Re: Table Field qualification
Okay, my suggestion is that whenever the user chooses a location, on
menu/row choice, set location = location + X where X is some delimiter
you choose.
Next, before you do the table refresh, you need to see if that delimiter
is in the location field, if it is, then use substr and strstr to parse
out all of the values in that field and create a dynamic query.
So, let's say that location = "Toronto | Houston | Sacremento |"
You would want the table qualification to state: ('Location' = "Toronto"
OR 'Location' = "Houston" OR 'Location' = "Sacremento") AND
You will need a guide that contains the following active links:
First Active Link:
Set tmpLocation = $Location$This will allow you to
parse Location without modifying what the user put in the Location field
Call guide below:
Guide:
First Active Link:
Set tmpInt = STRSTR($tmpLocation$, "|")
This gives you the location of the first | symbol,
assuming you use | as your delimiter.
Set tmpChar = RTRIM(SUBSTR($tmpLocation$, 0, $tmpInt$)))
This will give you your first location, up to the first
Pipe symbol
Set tmpLocation = LTRIM(SUBSTR($tmpLocation$, $tmpInt$))
This will give you the rest of the location, after the
first
Second Active Link:
If $tmpLocation$ != $NULL$ AND $tmpLocation$ != " "
Set tmpQuery = $tmpQuery$ + " OR 'Location' = " + $tmpChar$
GOTO Guide Label Start
Third Active Link: (this one is outside of the guide
Refresh Table field
Then the qualification on your table field will be:
(EXTERNAL($tmpQuery$) AND ('POSITION' =
$POSITION$))
Now granted, I didn't note in detail everything that needs to happen.
For instance, the first time your active link rusn that sets the
tmpQuery field, you will not want to have OR at the beginning of the set
fields statement. You will also need to put () around your array of OR
statements for the Location part of the query.
Plus the syntax might be off just a bit, you'll have to play with it.
It's been probably a year since I've used any of the functionality
listed above, and I'm just trying to write it from memory.
Thanks,
Gary Opela, Jr
Sr. Remedy Developer
Leader Communications, Inc.
405 736 3211
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96
CS/SCCE
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 12:05 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Table Field qualification
Why not just change the table qualification to $LOCATION$ LIKE "%" +
'LOCATION' = "%" AND $POSITION$ LIKE "%" + 'POSITION' + "%"
??
Sorry if I'm misunderstanding the issue and oversimplifying it.
Norm
-----Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 11:31 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Table Field qualification
**
Hello Everyone
I hope somebody can answer this...
I have a form with the following fields
LOCATION - A character field with a menu append
POSITION - A character field with a menu append
TABLE - A table field whose source form is a JOIN form of employee
location and employee position. This table gets refreshed and fetches
the
data based on the user selection of LOCATION and POSITION.
Table qualification is (( 'LOCATION' = $LOCATION$) AND ('POSITION' =
$POSITION$))
Now when the menu is appended and I have multiple values in the LOCATION
and POSITION fields, how would I set the table qualification ?
I am guessing it can be done using some External qualification but not
sure how ?
Thanks in advance for your time
Gere
__20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where
the Answers Are"
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
Re: Table Field qualification
Hi Norm
Thanks for your reply..
Let me explain the requirement in a more articulate way...
When a user selects a value from the menu on the LOCATION field ( say
ILLINOIS) and a value from the menu on the POSITION field ( say Supervisor)
the table field gets the data pertaining to all supervisors from Illinois..
Now the requirement is they want to select the multiple Locations (
Illinois, Indiana etc ) and multiple positions ( Supervisors, Managers
etc..) and they want the table field to show the data.
I am not sure how I set the qualification for values appended...
Any ideas
Thanks
Mike
On 8/21/07, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Why not just change the table qualification to $LOCATION$ LIKE "%" +
> 'LOCATION' = "%" AND $POSITION$ LIKE "%" + 'POSITION' + "%"
>
> ??
>
> Sorry if I'm misunderstanding the issue and oversimplifying it.
>
> Norm
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 11:31 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Table Field qualification
>
> **
> Hello Everyone
>
> I hope somebody can answer this...
>
> I have a form with the following fields
>
> LOCATION - A character field with a menu append
> POSITION - A character field with a menu append
> TABLE - A table field whose source form is a JOIN form of employee
> location and employee position. This table gets refreshed and fetches
> the
> data based on the user selection of LOCATION and POSITION.
>
> Table qualification is (( 'LOCATION' = $LOCATION$) AND ('POSITION' =
> $POSITION$))
>
> Now when the menu is appended and I have multiple values in the LOCATION
> and POSITION fields, how would I set the table qualification ?
>
> I am guessing it can be done using some External qualification but not
> sure how ?
>
> Thanks in advance for your time
>
> Gere
> __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in
> it___
>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where
> the Answers Are"
>
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
Re: Table Field qualification
Hi Gary
Thanks for the reply..I will try it out.
Thanks
Mike
On 8/21/07, Opela, Gary L Contr OC-ALC/ITMA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Okay, my suggestion is that whenever the user chooses a location, on
> menu/row choice, set location = location + X where X is some delimiter
> you choose.
>
> Next, before you do the table refresh, you need to see if that delimiter
> is in the location field, if it is, then use substr and strstr to parse
> out all of the values in that field and create a dynamic query.
>
> So, let's say that location = "Toronto | Houston | Sacremento |"
> You would want the table qualification to state: ('Location' = "Toronto"
> OR 'Location' = "Houston" OR 'Location' = "Sacremento") AND
>
> You will need a guide that contains the following active links:
> First Active Link:
>Set tmpLocation = $Location$This will allow you to
> parse Location without modifying what the user put in the Location field
>Call guide below:
>
> Guide:
>
> First Active Link:
>Set tmpInt = STRSTR($tmpLocation$, "|")
>This gives you the location of the first | symbol,
> assuming you use | as your delimiter.
>Set tmpChar = RTRIM(SUBSTR($tmpLocation$, 0, $tmpInt$)))
>This will give you your first location, up to the first
> Pipe symbol
>Set tmpLocation = LTRIM(SUBSTR($tmpLocation$, $tmpInt$))
>This will give you the rest of the location, after the
> first
>
> Second Active Link:
>If $tmpLocation$ != $NULL$ AND $tmpLocation$ != " "
>Set tmpQuery = $tmpQuery$ + " OR 'Location' = " + $tmpChar$
>GOTO Guide Label Start
>
> Third Active Link: (this one is outside of the guide
>Refresh Table field
>
> Then the qualification on your table field will be:
>(EXTERNAL($tmpQuery$) AND ('POSITION' =
> $POSITION$))
>
> Now granted, I didn't note in detail everything that needs to happen.
> For instance, the first time your active link rusn that sets the
> tmpQuery field, you will not want to have OR at the beginning of the set
> fields statement. You will also need to put () around your array of OR
> statements for the Location part of the query.
>
> Plus the syntax might be off just a bit, you'll have to play with it.
> It's been probably a year since I've used any of the functionality
> listed above, and I'm just trying to write it from memory.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Gary Opela, Jr
>
> Sr. Remedy Developer
>
> Leader Communications, Inc.
>
> 405 736 3211
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96
> CS/SCCE
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 12:05 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Table Field qualification
>
> Why not just change the table qualification to $LOCATION$ LIKE "%" +
> 'LOCATION' = "%" AND $POSITION$ LIKE "%" + 'POSITION' + "%"
>
> ??
>
> Sorry if I'm misunderstanding the issue and oversimplifying it.
>
> Norm
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 11:31 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Table Field qualification
>
> **
> Hello Everyone
>
> I hope somebody can answer this...
>
> I have a form with the following fields
>
> LOCATION - A character field with a menu append
> POSITION - A character field with a menu append
> TABLE - A table field whose source form is a JOIN form of employee
> location and employee position. This table gets refreshed and fetches
> the
> data based on the user selection of LOCATION and POSITION.
>
> Table qualification is (( 'LOCATION' = $LOCATION$) AND ('POSITION' =
> $POSITION$))
>
> Now when the menu is appended and I have multiple values in the LOCATION
> and POSITION fields, how would I set the table qualification ?
>
> I am guessing it can be done using some External qualification but not
> sure how ?
>
> Thanks in advance for your time
>
> Gere
> __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in
> it___
>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where
> the Answers Are"
>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where
> the Answers Are"
>
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
Re: Table Field qualification
You should be able to use the LIKE operator for that.
When you append values, the character field holds multiple string
values. One value is easy. Say "Florida" is the one value in the
field. Then you can just use equals as the operator.
When you append, however, the string becomes more complicated, as you
suggested. Now it might be "Florida Ohio".
That's where the LIKE operator comes in. Use LIKE instead of equals and
use the % wildcard.
Norm
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 1:04 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Table Field qualification
**
Hi Norm
Thanks for your reply..
Let me explain the requirement in a more articulate way...
When a user selects a value from the menu on the LOCATION field ( say
ILLINOIS) and a value from the menu on the POSITION field ( say
Supervisor)
the table field gets the data pertaining to all supervisors from
Illinois..
Now the requirement is they want to select the multiple Locations (
Illinois, Indiana etc ) and multiple positions ( Supervisors,
Managers etc..) and they want the table field to show the data.
I am not sure how I set the qualification for values appended...
Any ideas
Thanks
Mike
On 8/21/07, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Why not just change the table qualification to $LOCATION$ LIKE
"%" +
'LOCATION' = "%" AND $POSITION$ LIKE "%" + 'POSITION' + "%"
??
Sorry if I'm misunderstanding the issue and oversimplifying it.
Norm
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG <mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> ] On
Behalf Of Micheal Gere
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 11:31 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Table Field qualification
**
Hello Everyone
I hope somebody can answer this...
I have a form with the following fields
LOCATION - A character field with a menu append
POSITION - A character field with a menu append
TABLE - A table field whose source form is a JOIN form of
employee
location and employee position. This table gets refreshed and
fetches
the
data based on the user selection of LOCATION and POSITION.
Table qualification is (( 'LOCATION' = $LOCATION$) AND
('POSITION' =
$POSITION$))
Now when the menu is appended and I have multiple values in the
LOCATION
and POSITION fields, how would I set the table qualification ?
I am guessing it can be done using some External qualification
but not
sure how ?
Thanks in advance for your time
Gere
__20060125___This posting was submitted with
HTML in
it___
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
__20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
Re: Table Field qualification
Hi Gary
Firstly thanks for your code…I tried to play with the syntax and I think I
am almost there in making it work. I think there is some change required in
the second active link of the guide. Appreciate your help if you can figure
out something.
*Run If: *( 'tmpLocation' != $NULL$ ) AND ( 'tmpLocation' != " " )**
*Action 1: *Set fields**
tmpQuery = ((($tmpQuery$ + " OR 'LOCATION' = ") + """") + $tmpChar$) +
""""
*Action 2: *Go To Guide Label**
When I select the value in the LOCATION field = *Toronto** | Houston |
Sacramento |*
Then I get the following result
tmpchar =*Sacramento*
tmpQuery = *OR 'LOCATION' = " Toronto " OR 'LOCATION' = "Houston"
*
* *
Couple of questions:
1. How do we get rid of the OR at the beginning
2. The tmpQuery doesn't seem to get the third value. I looked at the
log and it doesn't fire the Active link since $tmpLocation$ != " "
Thanks
Mike
On 8/21/07, Opela, Gary L Contr OC-ALC/ITMA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Okay, my suggestion is that whenever the user chooses a location, on
> menu/row choice, set location = location + X where X is some delimiter
> you choose.
>
> Next, before you do the table refresh, you need to see if that delimiter
> is in the location field, if it is, then use substr and strstr to parse
> out all of the values in that field and create a dynamic query.
>
> So, let's say that location = "Toronto | Houston | Sacremento |"
> You would want the table qualification to state: ('Location' = "Toronto"
> OR 'Location' = "Houston" OR 'Location' = "Sacremento") AND
>
> You will need a guide that contains the following active links:
> First Active Link:
>Set tmpLocation = $Location$This will allow you to
> parse Location without modifying what the user put in the Location field
>Call guide below:
>
> Guide:
>
> First Active Link:
>Set tmpInt = STRSTR($tmpLocation$, "|")
>This gives you the location of the first | symbol,
> assuming you use | as your delimiter.
>Set tmpChar = RTRIM(SUBSTR($tmpLocation$, 0, $tmpInt$)))
>This will give you your first location, up to the first
> Pipe symbol
>Set tmpLocation = LTRIM(SUBSTR($tmpLocation$, $tmpInt$))
>This will give you the rest of the location, after the
> first
>
> Second Active Link:
>If $tmpLocation$ != $NULL$ AND $tmpLocation$ != " "
>Set tmpQuery = $tmpQuery$ + " OR 'Location' = " + $tmpChar$
>GOTO Guide Label Start
>
> Third Active Link: (this one is outside of the guide
>Refresh Table field
>
> Then the qualification on your table field will be:
>(EXTERNAL($tmpQuery$) AND ('POSITION' =
> $POSITION$))
>
> Now granted, I didn't note in detail everything that needs to happen.
> For instance, the first time your active link rusn that sets the
> tmpQuery field, you will not want to have OR at the beginning of the set
> fields statement. You will also need to put () around your array of OR
> statements for the Location part of the query.
>
> Plus the syntax might be off just a bit, you'll have to play with it.
> It's been probably a year since I've used any of the functionality
> listed above, and I'm just trying to write it from memory.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Gary Opela, Jr
>
> Sr. Remedy Developer
>
> Leader Communications, Inc.
>
> 405 736 3211
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96
> CS/SCCE
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 12:05 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Table Field qualification
>
> Why not just change the table qualification to $LOCATION$ LIKE "%" +
> 'LOCATION' = "%" AND $POSITION$ LIKE "%" + 'POSITION' + "%"
>
> ??
>
> Sorry if I'm misunderstanding the issue and oversimplifying it.
>
> Norm
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 11:31 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Table Field qualification
>
> **
> Hello Everyone
>
> I hope somebody can answer this...
>
> I have a form with the following fields
>
> LOCATION - A character field with a menu append
> POSITION - A character field
Re: Table Field qualification
To address the issue of the first 'OR', you will need duplicate active
links to set the tmpQuery field. The first one will run if tmpQuery =
$NULL$, then set tmpQuery = "'LOCATION' = $tmpChar$"
The second one will run if tmpQuery != $NULL$, then go ahead and do the
set fields below of tmpQuery = $tmpQuery$ + " OR 'LOCATION' = "
To address the second issue, you might try changing the Run-If from
If $tmpLocation$ != $NULL$ AND $tmpLocation$ != " "
To
If $tmpLocation$ LIKE ("%" + "|" + "%")
I think this might work, since you will always have a | symbol at the
end of your country strings, even if the user selects only one country.
Look into it and see if it will work. If it won't let us know and I'm
positive we can come up with something.
Thanks,
Gary Opela, Jr
Sr. Remedy Developer
Leader Communications, Inc.
405 736 3211
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 2:57 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Table Field qualification
**
Hi Gary
Firstly thanks for your code...I tried to play with the syntax and I
think I am almost there in making it work. I think there is some change
required in the second active link of the guide. Appreciate your help if
you can figure out something.
Run If: ( 'tmpLocation' != $NULL$ ) AND ( 'tmpLocation' != " " )
Action 1: Set fields
tmpQuery = ((($tmpQuery$ + " OR 'LOCATION' = ") + """") + $tmpChar$) +
""""
Action 2: Go To Guide Label
When I select the value in the LOCATION field = Toronto | Houston |
Sacramento |
Then I get the following result
tmpchar =Sacramento
tmpQuery = OR 'LOCATION' = " Toronto " OR 'LOCATION' =
"Houston"
Couple of questions:
1. How do we get rid of the OR at the beginning
2. The tmpQuery doesn't seem to get the third value. I looked at
the log and it doesn't fire the Active link since $tmpLocation$ != " "
Thanks
Mike
On 8/21/07, Opela, Gary L Contr OC-ALC/ITMA
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Okay, my suggestion is that whenever the user chooses a
location, on
menu/row choice, set location = location + X where X is some
delimiter
you choose.
Next, before you do the table refresh, you need to see if that
delimiter
is in the location field, if it is, then use substr and strstr
to parse
out all of the values in that field and create a dynamic query.
So, let's say that location = "Toronto | Houston | Sacremento |"
You would want the table qualification to state: ('Location' =
"Toronto"
OR 'Location' = "Houston" OR 'Location' = "Sacremento") AND
You will need a guide that contains the following active links:
First Active Link:
Set tmpLocation = $Location$This will allow
you to
parse Location without modifying what the user put in the
Location field
Call guide below:
Guide:
First Active Link:
Set tmpInt = STRSTR($tmpLocation$, "|")
This gives you the location of the first |
symbol,
assuming you use | as your delimiter.
Set tmpChar = RTRIM(SUBSTR($tmpLocation$, 0, $tmpInt$)))
This will give you your first location, up to the
first
Pipe symbol
Set tmpLocation = LTRIM(SUBSTR($tmpLocation$, $tmpInt$))
This will give you the rest of the location,
after the
first
Second Active Link:
If $tmpLocation$ != $NULL$ AND $tmpLocation$ != " "
Set tmpQuery = $tmpQuery$ + " OR 'Location' = " +
$tmpChar$
GOTO Guide Label Start
Third Active Link: (this one is outside of the guide
Refresh Table field
Then the qualification on your table field will be:
(EXTERNAL($tmpQuery$) AND ('POSITION' =
$POSITION$))
Now granted, I didn't note in detail everything that needs to
happen.
For instance, the first time your active link rusn that sets the
tmpQuery field, you will not want to have OR at the beginning of
the set
fields statement. You will also need to put () around your array
of OR
statements for the Location part of the query.
Plus the syntax might be off just a bit, you'll have to play
with it.
It's be
Re: Table Field qualification
Hi Gary
Thanks, the OR thing is eliminated but the last value is not being copied in
the tmpQuery
*Active Link 2 of the guide:*
* *
*Run If: ('tmpQuery' = $NULL$)*
* *
*Action 1: Set Fields*
* *
*tmpQuery = (( "'LOCATION' = " + """") + $tmpChar$) + """"*
* *
*Active Link 3 of the guide:*
* *
*Run If: ('tmpQuery' != $NULL$) AND 'tmpArea' LIKE ("%" + "|" + "%") *
* *
*Action 1: Set fields*
*tmpQuery = ((($tmpQuery$ + " OR 'LOCATION' = ") + """") + $tmpChar$) + """"
*
* *
*Action 2: Go To Guide Label*
When I select the value in the LOCATION field = *Toronto** | Houston |
Sacramento |*
Then I get the following result
tmpchar =*Sacramento*
tmpQuery = *'LOCATION' = " Toronto " OR 'LOCATION' = " Toronto "
OR'LOCATION' = "Houston"*
Thanks
Mike
On 8/27/07, Opela, Gary L Contr OC-ALC/ITMA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> To address the issue of the first 'OR', you will need duplicate active
> links to set the tmpQuery field. The first one will run if tmpQuery =
> $NULL$, then set tmpQuery = "'LOCATION' = $tmpChar$"
>
> The second one will run if tmpQuery != $NULL$, then go ahead and do the
> set fields below of tmpQuery = $tmpQuery$ + " OR 'LOCATION' = "
>
> To address the second issue, you might try changing the Run-If from
>If $tmpLocation$ != $NULL$ AND $tmpLocation$ != " "
> To
>If $tmpLocation$ LIKE ("%" + "|" + "%")
>
> I think this might work, since you will always have a | symbol at the
> end of your country strings, even if the user selects only one country.
>
> Look into it and see if it will work. If it won't let us know and I'm
> positive we can come up with something.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Gary Opela, Jr
>
> Sr. Remedy Developer
>
> Leader Communications, Inc.
>
> 405 736 3211
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 2:57 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Table Field qualification
>
> **
> Hi Gary
>
>
> Firstly thanks for your code...I tried to play with the syntax and I
> think I am almost there in making it work. I think there is some change
> required in the second active link of the guide. Appreciate your help if
> you can figure out something.
>
>
>
> Run If: ( 'tmpLocation' != $NULL$ ) AND ( 'tmpLocation' != " " )
>
>
>
> Action 1: Set fields
>
>
>
> tmpQuery = ((($tmpQuery$ + " OR 'LOCATION' = ") + """") + $tmpChar$) +
> """"
>
>
>
> Action 2: Go To Guide Label
>
>
>
> When I select the value in the LOCATION field = Toronto | Houston |
> Sacramento |
>
> Then I get the following result
>
> tmpchar =Sacramento
>
> tmpQuery = OR 'LOCATION' = " Toronto " OR 'LOCATION' =
> "Houston"
>
>
>
> Couple of questions:
>
> 1. How do we get rid of the OR at the beginning
> 2. The tmpQuery doesn't seem to get the third value. I looked at
> the log and it doesn't fire the Active link since $tmpLocation$ != " "
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> On 8/21/07, Opela, Gary L Contr OC-ALC/ITMA
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Okay, my suggestion is that whenever the user chooses a
> location, on
>menu/row choice, set location = location + X where X is some
> delimiter
>you choose.
>
>Next, before you do the table refresh, you need to see if that
> delimiter
>is in the location field, if it is, then use substr and strstr
> to parse
>out all of the values in that field and create a dynamic query.
>
>So, let's say that location = "Toronto | Houston | Sacremento |"
>You would want the table qualification to state: ('Location' =
> "Toronto"
>OR 'Location' = "Houston" OR 'Location' = "Sacremento") AND
>
>
>You will need a guide that contains the following active links:
>First Active Link:
> Set tmpLocation = $Location$This will allow
> you to
>parse Location without modifying what the user put in the
> Location field
>
Re: Table Field qualification
Mike, assuming you have all of your active links firing in the proper
order, and that none of the mutually exclusive active links are firing
at the same time (such as the two active links that set the tmpQuery
field), then you should have the following:
If $Location$ = "Toronto | Houston | Sacramento |"
First Round:
tmpLocation = "Toronto | Houston | Sacramento |"
Set tmpInt = 9
Set tmpChar = Toronto
Set tmpLocation = Houston | Sacramento |
Set tmpQuery = 'Location' = "Toronto"
Second Round:
tmpLocation = "Houston | Sacramento |"
Set tmpInt = 9
Set tmpChar = Houston
Set tmpLocation = Sacramento |
Set tmpQuery = 'Location' = "Toronto" OR 'Location' = "Houston"
Third Round:
tmpLocation = "Sacramento |"
Set tmpInt = 12
Set tmpChar = Sacramento
Set tmpLocation =
Set tmpQuery = 'Location' = "Toronto" OR 'Location' = "Houston" OR
'Location' = "Sacramento"
Check your active link logging on the client and post what's going on so
I can see what's happening.
What's confusing me is the tmpQuery it is building is showing up as
Toronto, Toronto, Houston instead of Toronto, Houston, Sacramento. I'm
wondering if both Torontos are getting added in Round 1 some how, or if
your tmpInt field is not getting set properly, or what. The logs will
tell.
Thanks,
Gary Opela, Jr
Sr. Remedy Developer
Leader Communications, Inc.
405 736 3211
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 4:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Table Field qualification
**
Hi Gary
Thanks, the OR thing is eliminated but the last value is not being
copied in the tmpQuery
Active Link 2 of the guide:
Run If: ('tmpQuery' = $NULL$)
Action 1: Set Fields
tmpQuery = (( "'LOCATION' = " + """") + $tmpChar$) + """"
Active Link 3 of the guide:
Run If: ('tmpQuery' != $NULL$) AND 'tmpArea' LIKE ("%" + "|" + "%")
Action 1: Set fields
tmpQuery = ((($tmpQuery$ + " OR 'LOCATION' = ") + """") + $tmpChar$)
+ """"
Action 2: Go To Guide Label
When I select the value in the LOCATION field = Toronto | Houston |
Sacramento |
Then I get the following result
tmpchar = Sacramento
tmpQuery = 'LOCATION' = " Toronto " OR 'LOCATION' = "
Toronto " OR'LOCATION' = "Houston"
Thanks
Mike
On 8/27/07, Opela, Gary L Contr OC-ALC/ITMA
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To address the issue of the first 'OR', you will need duplicate
active
links to set the tmpQuery field. The first one will run if
tmpQuery =
$NULL$, then set tmpQuery = "'LOCATION' = $tmpChar$"
The second one will run if tmpQuery != $NULL$, then go ahead and
do the
set fields below of tmpQuery = $tmpQuery$ + " OR 'LOCATION' =
"
To address the second issue, you might try changing the Run-If
from
If $tmpLocation$ != $NULL$ AND $tmpLocation$ != " "
To
If $tmpLocation$ LIKE ("%" + "|" + "%")
I think this might work, since you will always have a | symbol
at the
end of your country strings, even if the user selects only one
country.
Look into it and see if it will work. If it won't let us know
and I'm
positive we can come up with something.
Thanks,
Gary Opela, Jr
Sr. Remedy Developer
Leader Communications, Inc.
405 736 3211
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micheal Gere
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 2:57 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Table Field qualification
**
Hi Gary
Firstly thanks for your code...I tried to play with the syntax
and I
think I am almost there in making it work. I think there is some
change
required in the second active link of the guide. Appreciate your
help if
you can figure out something.
Run If: ( 'tmpLocation' != $NULL$ ) AND ( 'tmpLocation' != "
" )
Action 1: Set fields
tmpQuery = ((($tmpQuery$ + " OR 'LOCATION' = &qu
Re: Table Field Qualification
Andy, I've have added a couple of table fields to our Home page. I set the qualification on the table to use a field on the form and then use EXTERNAL($Log Call Query$) to execute the query. It provides a lot more control. I then use an Active Link to set the Log Call Query field. In our case I'm looking for Open tickets assigned to a particular Support Group using the following: "'Status' <= ""RESPONDED"" AND 'Support-Region' = $Support-Region$ AND 'Support-Desk' = $Support-Desk$ AND 'Support-Group'=$Support-Group$" The active link then refreshes the table. This gives me the flexibility to test the query using the client and with a little substitution execute it for the table field. Dave -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mayfield, Andy L. Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:51 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table Field Qualification I am attempting to add a table field to our Home Page and I having difficulty with the qualification statement. What I am trying to do is this: Show all tickets that have been assigned to 'Assigned Group' "XXX" with the 'Status' of "Resolved" for 5 or more days. I am able to perform this search in the user tool using the '*Status-History.Resolved.TIME' field. The problem is this not an option in the admin tool on the qualification statement. If I try to type that into the Qualification statement, after I save automatically changes it to '*Status-History.New.TIME'. If anyone has an idea I will try anything at this point. Thanks, Andy L. Mayfield System Operation Specialist Alabama Power Company Office: 8-226-1805 ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
Use the resolved date as part of the qualification Resolved Date > TIMESTAMP + (3600 * 24 * 5) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 3:50 PM Subject: Table Field Qualification I am attempting to add a table field to our Home Page and I having difficulty with the qualification statement. What I am trying to do is this: Show all tickets that have been assigned to 'Assigned Group' "XXX" with the 'Status' of "Resolved" for 5 or more days. I am able to perform this search in the user tool using the '*Status-History.Resolved.TIME' field. The problem is this not an option in the admin tool on the qualification statement. If I try to type that into the Qualification statement, after I save automatically changes it to '*Status-History.New.TIME'. If anyone has an idea I will try anything at this point. Thanks, Andy L. Mayfield System Operation Specialist Alabama Power Company Office: 8-226-1805 ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
Okay, so here's how you do it. Put a View Form on top of the H Table. Point the table field to that if you only need request id. If you need more data, slap a join form on top of the H table and the remedy schema, then point your table field to that. This should work. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mayfield, Andy L. Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 2:51 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table Field Qualification I am attempting to add a table field to our Home Page and I having difficulty with the qualification statement. What I am trying to do is this: Show all tickets that have been assigned to 'Assigned Group' "XXX" with the 'Status' of "Resolved" for 5 or more days. I am able to perform this search in the user tool using the '*Status-History.Resolved.TIME' field. The problem is this not an option in the admin tool on the qualification statement. If I try to type that into the Qualification statement, after I save automatically changes it to '*Status-History.New.TIME'. If anyone has an idea I will try anything at this point. Thanks, Andy L. Mayfield System Operation Specialist Alabama Power Company Office: 8-226-1805 ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
How about using a Resolved Date field and setting it to $TIMESTAMP$ when the ticket goes into Resolved status? That should get you started. Roger A. Nall Manager, OSSNMS Remedy T-Mobile USA Desk: 813-348-2556(New) Cell: 973-652-6723 FAX: 813-348-2565 sf49fanv AIM IM RogerNall Yahoo IM -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mayfield, Andy L. Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:51 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table Field Qualification I am attempting to add a table field to our Home Page and I having difficulty with the qualification statement. What I am trying to do is this: Show all tickets that have been assigned to 'Assigned Group' "XXX" with the 'Status' of "Resolved" for 5 or more days. I am able to perform this search in the user tool using the '*Status-History.Resolved.TIME' field. The problem is this not an option in the admin tool on the qualification statement. If I try to type that into the Qualification statement, after I save automatically changes it to '*Status-History.New.TIME'. If anyone has an idea I will try anything at this point. Thanks, Andy L. Mayfield System Operation Specialist Alabama Power Company Office: 8-226-1805 ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
Have you tried using that to build an external qualification and using it in the table field? I can't say it will work as you want but considering that field values get expanded after hitting the db, you may stand a chance of success.. Joe - Original Message From: "Mayfield, Andy L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:50:40 PM Subject: Table Field Qualification I am attempting to add a table field to our Home Page and I having difficulty with the qualification statement. What I am trying to do is this: Show all tickets that have been assigned to 'Assigned Group' "XXX" with the 'Status' of "Resolved" for 5 or more days. I am able to perform this search in the user tool using the '*Status-History.Resolved.TIME' field. The problem is this not an option in the admin tool on the qualification statement. If I try to type that into the Qualification statement, after I save automatically changes it to '*Status-History.New.TIME'. If anyone has an idea I will try anything at this point. Thanks, Andy L. Mayfield System Operation Specialist Alabama Power Company Office: 8-226-1805 Be a PS3 game guru. Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games. http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121 ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
I was finally able to get it to work on our production server. For some
reason the 'Resolve Date' field on our Dev server was acting really
strange and giving me varying results. It appears to be working on the
production server with no problems.
I used:
('Assigned Group' = "XXX" AND 'Status' = "Resolved") AND ('Resolve Date'
<= ( $TIMESTAMP$ - ( 60 * ( 60* ( 24 * 5 ) ) ) )
Thanks for suggestions. Its sounds I had it right to start with, but was
getting weird results on the DEV server.
Andy L. Mayfield
System Operation Specialist
Alabama Power Company
Office: 8-226-1805
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joe DeSouza
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:47 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Table Field Qualification
Have you tried using that to build an external qualification and using
it in the table field? I can't say it will work as you want but
considering that field values get expanded after hitting the db, you may
stand a chance of success..
Joe
- Original Message
From: "Mayfield, Andy L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:50:40 PM
Subject: Table Field Qualification
I am attempting to add a table field to our Home Page and I having
difficulty with the qualification statement.
What I am trying to do is this:
Show all tickets that have been assigned to 'Assigned Group' "XXX" with
the 'Status' of "Resolved" for 5 or more days.
I am able to perform this search in the user tool using the
'*Status-History.Resolved.TIME' field. The problem is this not an option
in the admin tool on the qualification statement. If I try to type that
into the Qualification statement, after I save automatically changes it
to '*Status-History.New.TIME'.
If anyone has an idea I will try anything at this point.
Thanks,
Andy L. Mayfield
System Operation Specialist
Alabama Power Company
Office: 8-226-1805
Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A
<http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTFvbGNhMGE3BF9TAzM5NjU0NTE
wOARfcwMzOTY1NDUxMDMEc2VjA21haWxfdGFnbGluZQRzbGsDbWFpbF90YWcx?link=ask&s
id=396546091> for great tips from Yahoo! Answers
<http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTFvbGNhMGE3BF9TAzM5NjU0NTE
wOARfcwMzOTY1NDUxMDMEc2VjA21haWxfdGFnbGluZQRzbGsDbWFpbF90YWcx?link=ask&s
id=396546091> users.
__20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
Can you restate the following? Then maybe we can help. "shows Unassigned HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that is logged into Remedy User" Observations: - an unassigned ticket is an unassigned ticket, regardless of who is looking at it - unassigned to a group? an individual? both? Axton Grams On 10/31/06, John Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello all. AR Server 6.03 Helpdesk App 6.0 Having trouble with a Qualification: I'm trying to create a table on my support form that only shows Unassigned HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that is logged into Remedy User. Any suggestion? ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
Restated: If I log into remedy, as a support staff member of Help Desk. I should see a table of Calls that were Auto-Assigned to the Helpdesk with no particular assignee.Or another way to say it, is "My groups unassigned calls" I'm also not sure what form to grab from HPD:Heldesk or SHR:Consolatedlist Thanks JK Axton <[EMAIL PROTECTED] L.COM> To Sent by: "Action arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Request System cc discussion list(ARSList)"Subject <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Table Field Qualification ORG> 10/31/2006 07:04 PM Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] RG Can you restate the following? Then maybe we can help. "shows Unassigned HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that is logged into Remedy User" Observations: - an unassigned ticket is an unassigned ticket, regardless of who is looking at it - unassigned to a group? an individual? both? Axton Grams On 10/31/06, John Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello all. > > AR Server 6.03 > Helpdesk App 6.0 > > Having trouble with a Qualification: > I'm trying to create a table on my support form that only shows Unassigned > HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that is logged into Remedy User. > > Any suggestion? > > ___ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" > ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Table Field Qualification
** John, This is the qualification we use to show tickets assigned to the group you belong to, plus tickets assigned specifically for you. Idea is that if the unassigned tickets belong to you, you can easily see them and pick them up (somewhat against human nature in reality). (( 'Assigned To' = $USER$) OR (( 'Assigned To' = $NULL$ ) AND ( 'Assigned To Group+' != $NULL$ ) AND ($GROUPS$ LIKE (( "%" + 'Assigned To Group+') + "%" AND ((( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINHELPDESK" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' < 4)) OR (( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINCHANGE" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' < 6)) OR (( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINTASK" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' < 4))) Now that brings up the question of how the table qualification above knows what group you are in. Logically I know that information should be setting on the form but a quick look through did not show it to me. This is an out of the box form that we have customized heavily. There's no 112 field, so it must be magic or some field is being used in an unexpected way. Sorry I couldn't be of more help on this part. hth, Susan Susan Palmer ShopperTrak 312-529-5325 On 10/31/06, John Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Restated:If I log into remedy, as a support staff member of Help Desk. I should seea table of Calls that were Auto-Assigned to the Helpdesk with no particular assignee.Or another way to say it, is "My groups unassigned calls"I'm also not sure what form to grab from HPD:Heldesk or SHR:ConsolatedlistThanks JKAxton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]L.COM> ToSent by: "Action arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Request System ccdiscussionlist(ARSList)"Subject< [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Table Field QualificationORG>10/31/2006 07:04PMPlease respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] RGCan you restate the following? Then maybe we can help."shows Unassigned HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that islogged into Remedy User" Observations:- an unassigned ticket is an unassigned ticket, regardless of who islooking at it- unassigned to a group? an individual? both?Axton GramsOn 10/31/06, John Kelley < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Hello all.>> AR Server 6.03> Helpdesk App 6.0>> Having trouble with a Qualification:> I'm trying to create a table on my support form that only shows Unassigned> HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that is logged into RemedyUser.>> Any suggestion?>>___ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Wherethe Answers Are">___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Wherethe Answers Are"___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
Re: Table Field Qualification
Thanks Susan, that works great, now I just have to play with the
Qualification to take out my calls assigned to me.
Question for you: Is your Qualification looking in the Consolidated list
form or the HPD:HelpDesk?
JK
Susan Palmer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
L.COM> To
Sent by: "Action arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Request System cc
discussion
list(ARSList)"Subject
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Table Field Qualification
ORG>
11/01/2006 12:25
PM
Please respond to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RG
**
John,
This is the qualification we use to show tickets assigned to the group you
belong to, plus tickets assigned specifically for you. Idea is that if the
unassigned tickets belong to you, you can easily see them and pick them up
(somewhat against human nature in reality).
(( 'Assigned To' = $USER$) OR (( 'Assigned To' = $NULL$ ) AND ( 'Assigned
To Group+' != $NULL$ ) AND ($GROUPS$ LIKE (( "%" + 'Assigned To Group+')
+ "%" AND ((( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINHELPDESK" ) AND ( 'Status
Integer' < 4)) OR (( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINCHANGE" ) AND ( 'Status Integer'
< 6)) OR (( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINTASK" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' < 4)))
Now that brings up the question of how the table qualification above knows
what group you are in. Logically I know that information should be setting
on the form but a quick look through did not show it to me. This is an out
of the box form that we have customized heavily. There's no 112 field, so
it must be magic or some field is being used in an unexpected way. Sorry I
couldn't be of more help on this part.
hth,
Susan
Susan Palmer
ShopperTrak
312-529-5325
On 10/31/06, John Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Restated:
If I log into remedy, as a support staff member of Help Desk. I should
see
a table of Calls that were Auto-Assigned to the Helpdesk with no
particular
assignee.Or another way to say it, is "My groups unassigned calls"
I'm also not sure what form to grab from HPD:Heldesk or
SHR:Consolatedlist
Thanks JK
Axton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
L.COM> To
Sent by: "Action arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Request System cc
discussion
list(ARSList)"Subject
< [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Table Field Qualification
ORG>
10/31/2006 07:04
PM
Please respond to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RG
Can you restate the following? Then maybe we can help.
"shows Unassigned HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that is
logged into Remedy User"
Observations:
- an unassigned ticket is an unassigned ticket, regardless of who is
looking at it
- unassigned to a group? an individual? both?
Axton Grams
On 10/31/06, John Kelley < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello all.
>
> AR Server 6.03
> Helpdesk App 6.0
>
> Having trouble with a Qualification:
> I'm trying to create a table on my support form that only shows
Unassigned
> HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that is logged into Remedy
User.
>
> Any suggestion?
>
>
___
Re: Table Field Qualification
** SHR:Consolidated That's how we show them their Changes, Tasks and HTs in one table. Also, Michelle brought it to my attention that $GROUP$ looks at the zAssignedGroup field on the Consolidated form and that's how it knows whether the logged in person is in that group. She also brought up that =< are better to use than just <. That part of out of the box hope they've modified it in newer versions (was 5.0). Glad it worked Susan On 11/1/06, John Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thanks Susan, that works great, now I just have to play with theQualification to take out my calls assigned to me. Question for you: Is your Qualification looking in the Consolidated listform or the HPD:HelpDesk?JKSusan Palmer<[EMAIL PROTECTED] L.COM> ToSent by: "Action arslist@ARSLIST.ORGRequest System cc discussionlist(ARSList)"Subject <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Table Field QualificationORG>11/01/2006 12:25 PMPlease respond to[EMAIL PROTECTED] RG**John,This is the qualification we use to show tickets assigned to the group you belong to, plus tickets assigned specifically for you. Idea is that if theunassigned tickets belong to you, you can easily see them and pick them up(somewhat against human nature in reality).(( 'Assigned To' = $USER$) OR (( 'Assigned To' = $NULL$ ) AND ( 'Assigned To Group+' != $NULL$ ) AND ($GROUPS$ LIKE (( "%" + 'Assigned To Group+')+ "%" AND ((( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINHELPDESK" ) AND ( 'StatusInteger' < 4)) OR (( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINCHANGE" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' < 6)) OR (( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINTASK" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' < 4)))Now that brings up the question of how the table qualification above knowswhat group you are in. Logically I know that information should be setting on the form but a quick look through did not show it to me. This is an outof the box form that we have customized heavily. There's no 112 field, soit must be magic or some field is being used in an unexpected way. Sorry I couldn't be of more help on this part.hth,SusanSusan PalmerShopperTrak312-529-5325On 10/31/06, John Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:Restated:If I log into remedy, as a support staff member of Help Desk. I shouldseea table of Calls that were Auto-Assigned to the Helpdesk with noparticularassignee.Or another way to say it, is "My groups unassigned calls" I'm also not sure what form to grab from HPD:Heldesk orSHR:ConsolatedlistThanks JK Axton <[EMAIL PROTECTED] L.COM > To Sent by: "Action arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Request System cc discussion list(ARSList)"Subject < [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Table Field Qualification ORG> 10/31/2006 07:04 PM Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]RGCan you restate the following? Then maybe we can help. "shows Unassigned HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that islogged into Remedy User"Observations:- an unassigned ticket is an unassigned ticket, regardless of who islooking at it - unassigned to a group? an individual? both?Axton GramsOn 10/31/06, John Kelley < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Hello all.> > AR Server 6.03> Helpdesk App 6.0>> Having trouble with a Qualification:> I'm trying to create a table on my support form that only showsUnassigned> HPD and CHG requests, for only the person that is logged into Remedy User.>> Any suggestion?>>___> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.orgARSlist:"Wherethe Answers Are">___UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Wherethe Answers Are"___UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Wherethe Answers Are"__20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML init__ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
Re: Table Field Qualification
** Thanks for posting, Susan.. Actually, I use $GROUPIDS$ to look at the 'zAssignedGroupID' field. Since this field exists on Helpdesk, Task, and Change, we added 'zAssignedGroupID' to the SHR:Consolidated list form. So instead of comparing group names we compare IDs. This prevents picking up groups with similar names like "Service Desk" OR "Service Desk - Desktop", etc. So the qualification below would now appear as: (( 'Assigned To' = $USER$) OR (( 'Assigned To' = $NULL$ ) AND ( 'Assigned To Group+' != $NULL$ ) AND ($GROUPIDS$ LIKE (( "%" + 'zAssignedGroupID ') + "%" AND ((( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINHELPDESK" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' <=3)) OR (( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINCHANGE" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' <=5)) OR (( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINTASK" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' <=3))) Thanks again, Susan. Hope it helps, John. Michelle From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan PalmerSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 1:51 PMTo: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGSubject: Re: Table Field Qualification ** SHR:Consolidated That's how we show them their Changes, Tasks and HTs in one table. Also, Michelle brought it to my attention that $GROUP$ looks at the zAssignedGroup field on the Consolidated form and that's how it knows whether the logged in person is in that group. She also brought up that =< are better to use than just <. That part of out of the box hope they've modified it in newer versions (was 5.0). Glad it worked Susan On 11/1/06, John Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thanks Susan, that works great, now I just have to play with theQualification to take out my calls assigned to me. Question for you: Is your Qualification looking in the Consolidated listform or the HPD:HelpDesk?JKSusan Palmer<[EMAIL PROTECTED] L.COM> ToSent by: "Action arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Request System cc discussionlist(ARSList)"Subject<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Table Field QualificationORG>11/01/2006 12:25 PMPlease respond to[EMAIL PROTECTED] RG**John,This is the qualification we use to show tickets assigned to the group you belong to, plus tickets assigned specifically for you. Idea is that if theunassigned tickets belong to you, you can easily see them and pick them up(somewhat against human nature in reality).(( 'Assigned To' = $USER$) OR (( 'Assigned To' = $NULL$ ) AND ( 'Assigned To Group+' != $NULL$ ) AND ($GROUPS$ LIKE (( "%" + 'Assigned To Group+')+ "%" AND ((( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINHELPDESK" ) AND ( 'StatusInteger' < 4)) OR (( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINCHANGE" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' < 6)) OR (( 'zTmpKeyword' = "MAINTASK" ) AND ( 'Status Integer' < 4)))Now that brings up the question of how the table qualification above knowswhat group you are in. Logically I know that information should be setting on the form but a quick look through did not show it to me. This is an outof the box form that we have customized heavily. There's no 112 field, soit must be magic or some field is being used in an unexpected way. Sorry I couldn't be of more help on this part.hth,SusanSusan PalmerShopperTrak312-529-5325On 10/31/06, John Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:Restated:If I log into remedy, as a support staff member of Help Desk. I shouldseea table of Calls that were Auto-Assigned to the Helpdesk with noparticularassignee.Or another way to say it, is "My groups unassigned calls" I'm also not sure what form to grab from HPD:Heldesk orSHR:ConsolatedlistThanks JK Axton <[EMAIL PROTECTED] L.COM > To Sent by: "Action arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Request System cc discussion list(ARSList)"Subject < [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Table Field Qualification ORG> 10/31/2006 07:04 PM Please resp
Unusual Table Field Qualification Results
Hi All,
I have a table field that pulls in the Product Categorization Tier 1-3 fields
from PCT:Product Catalog and am seeing weird behavior based on the
qualification. I have search qualification fields on the form to help the user
narrow down the list of tiers being shown in the table. My Qualification for
the table has elements that look something like this:
'Product Categorization Tier 1' LIKE (("%" + $Tier 1 Search$) + "%")
I just add AND clauses to that for the other two tiers. What I'm seeing,
though, is that I get different behavior for each of the fields. For example,
with just that above, and the Tier 1 Search field empty, I get all records
displayed in the table. However, if I change the field referenced on the
PCT:Product Catalog table to Product Categorization Tier 2 and still with the
Search field empty, I get back 145 rows. If I change it to Tier 3, I get back
457 rows. In all cases, that should effectively be translating to the
following:
'Product Categorization Tier X' LIKE "%%"
But it's not behaving that way. Using that statement above, I get all rows,
but as soon as I add the field reference to the Search field, I get less
results for Tier 2 and Tier 3, even though the Search field is empty.
Has anybody ever seen behavior similar to that? Any ideas how to fix it?
AR Server 7.1
ITSM Suite 7.0.03
Thanks,
Lyle Taylor
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all
copies of the original message.
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Table field qualification length restrictions
I have an issue that I am tracking down and I think a possible point of issue is the table field qualification. We are using a text field that is a compilation of data. We are then doing a "contains" qualification check against that field. When we hit a field length of just under 2000 characters ( I know that is a lot ) it seems to give an obscure error. I don't have the error in front of me so I can't include it, which I know might help someone figure out the issue for me, but my real question is, does anyone know of a length limitation on the table field's qualification and does external impact that at all? Any advice or guidance on this would help. It is mostly for us to decide if we have to rewrite that process now (urgently) or later (not the issue). Thanks all, Brian Goralczyk ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Help with table field qualification!!!!!!!
Title: Message ** Hello All, I have a display only form which has a table field which gets data populated from some backend table. Now this backend table has multiple entries of a particular user/region and I want that only distinct values should be populated in the display-only table. How can this be achieved? How should the table qualification be built in this case? I tried using External with set fields in some char field as qualification but this did not get processed. Any ideas how it can be done?? Thanks. Warm Regards, Nisha Ramtri Remedy Development, ITAC, ST Microelectronics Ltd. Plot#1, Knowledge Park-III, Greater Noida. Ph# (0120)3916000 Extn:6247 PSTN# (0120)4006247 __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
Dynamic Table Field Qualification help
Greetings All, I'm hoping someone can help with a table field qualification problem I've been trying to figure out. Form A has a table field that shows all entries from Form B where 'UserID' on Form A = 'UserID' on Form B. I need to have 3 drop-down menus on Form A that can be used to "filter" the table. The user should be able to choose a value in any one of these menus to further refine the table field qualification. These menu fields are copies of fields from Form B with an extra option added in the Attributes for "Show All." So, if the menu field on Form B has values of 0, 1, and 2, the corresponding menu field on Form A will have values of 0, 1, 2, and 3 with the 3 being "Show All." If I use the EXTERNAL feature so that the table qualification is dynamic, what happens if the user doesn't use the menus on Form A, or only chooses a value other than "Show All" on 1 or 2 of them? For example, I have the following qualification: 'UserID' = $UserID$ AND 'Field1' = EXTERNAL($menu1$) AND 'Field2' = EXTERNAL($menu2$) AND 'Field3' = EXTERNAL($menu3$) However, if the menu on Form A is "Show All" then I need the qualification to ignore the 'Field' = EXTERNAL($menu$) bit of the qualification so that it brings back all entries regardless of the value of 'Field'. Does this make sense? ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at http://www.wwrug.org
Re: Unusual Table Field Qualification Results
Enable DB Logging and see what the server is sending the database...
On Aug 2, 4:39 pm, Lyle Taylor wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I have a table field that pulls in the Product Categorization Tier 1-3 fields
> from PCT:Product Catalog and am seeing weird behavior based on the
> qualification. I have search qualification fields on the form to help the
> user narrow down the list of tiers being shown in the table. My
> Qualification for the table has elements that look something like this:
>
> 'Product Categorization Tier 1' LIKE (("%" + $Tier 1 Search$) + "%")
>
> I just add AND clauses to that for the other two tiers. What I'm seeing,
> though, is that I get different behavior for each of the fields. For
> example, with just that above, and the Tier 1 Search field empty, I get all
> records displayed in the table. However, if I change the field referenced on
> the PCT:Product Catalog table to Product Categorization Tier 2 and still with
> the Search field empty, I get back 145 rows. If I change it to Tier 3, I get
> back 457 rows. In all cases, that should effectively be translating to the
> following:
>
> 'Product Categorization Tier X' LIKE "%%"
>
> But it's not behaving that way. Using that statement above, I get all rows,
> but as soon as I add the field reference to the Search field, I get less
> results for Tier 2 and Tier 3, even though the Search field is empty.
>
> Has anybody ever seen behavior similar to that? Any ideas how to fix it?
>
> AR Server 7.1
> ITSM Suite 7.0.03
>
> Thanks,
> Lyle Taylor
>
> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
> and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all
> copies of the original message.
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org
> attend wwrug11www.wwrug.comARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Unusual Table Field Qualification Results
OK, it's translating the empty field into a space like this:
WHERE (T438.C20005 LIKE (('%' || ' ') || '%'))
This was causing it to only return entries that had a space in that field's
value. This explains why I see so many qualifications like this:
(($Tier 1 Search$ = " ") OR ('Product Categorization Tier 1' LIKE ("%" + $Tier
1 Search$ + "%")))
For some reason, I wasn't getting this to work for me before. I must have been
structuring the qualification wrong somehow. The qualification above works for
me on all columns.
Thanks!
Lyle
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Chuck
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 6:22 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Unusual Table Field Qualification Results
Enable DB Logging and see what the server is sending the database...
On Aug 2, 4:39 pm, Lyle Taylor wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I have a table field that pulls in the Product Categorization Tier 1-3 fields
> from PCT:Product Catalog and am seeing weird behavior based on the
> qualification. I have search qualification fields on the form to help the
> user narrow down the list of tiers being shown in the table. My
> Qualification for the table has elements that look something like this:
>
> 'Product Categorization Tier 1' LIKE (("%" + $Tier 1 Search$) + "%")
>
> I just add AND clauses to that for the other two tiers. What I'm seeing,
> though, is that I get different behavior for each of the fields. For
> example, with just that above, and the Tier 1 Search field empty, I get all
> records displayed in the table. However, if I change the field referenced on
> the PCT:Product Catalog table to Product Categorization Tier 2 and still with
> the Search field empty, I get back 145 rows. If I change it to Tier 3, I get
> back 457 rows. In all cases, that should effectively be translating to the
> following:
>
> 'Product Categorization Tier X' LIKE "%%"
>
> But it's not behaving that way. Using that statement above, I get all rows,
> but as soon as I add the field reference to the Search field, I get less
> results for Tier 2 and Tier 3, even though the Search field is empty.
>
> Has anybody ever seen behavior similar to that? Any ideas how to fix it?
>
> AR Server 7.1
> ITSM Suite 7.0.03
>
> Thanks,
> Lyle Taylor
>
> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
> and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all
> copies of the original message.
>
> __
> _ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org
> attend wwrug11www.wwrug.comARSList: "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: Table field qualification length restrictions
Can you do this same qualification in a simple search or do you get the same error. Maybe show us the qualification as well. Lisa -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Brian Goralczyk Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 10:37 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table field qualification length restrictions ** I have an issue that I am tracking down and I think a possible point of issue is the table field qualification. We are using a text field that is a compilation of data. We are then doing a "contains" qualification check against that field. When we hit a field length of just under 2000 characters ( I know that is a lot ) it seems to give an obscure error. I don't have the error in front of me so I can't include it, which I know might help someone figure out the issue for me, but my real question is, does anyone know of a length limitation on the table field's qualification and does external impact that at all? Any advice or guidance on this would help. It is mostly for us to decide if we have to rewrite that process now (urgently) or later (not the issue). Thanks all, Brian Goralczyk _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Table field qualification length restrictions
Lisa, I could certainly complete the process another way. But since this is an a current issue I am not looking to redesign it unless I have to. That is why I am asking about a limitation in the field length of the qualification rather than how to redesign it. And the error isn't a Remedy telling me the field is too long error. It is more obscure. This request is more to see if anyone else has ran into a length issue and might know what it is. But thank you for the suggestion. Brian Goralczyk On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Kemes, Lisa A DLA CTR INFORMATION OPERATIONS wrote: > Can you do this same qualification in a simple search or do you get the > same error. Maybe show us the qualification as well. > > Lisa > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Brian Goralczyk > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 10:37 AM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Table field qualification length restrictions > > ** > I have an issue that I am tracking down and I think a possible point of > issue is the table field qualification. > > We are using a text field that is a compilation of data. We are then > doing a "contains" qualification check against that field. When we hit > a field length of just under 2000 characters ( I know that is a lot ) it > seems to give an obscure error. > > I don't have the error in front of me so I can't include it, which I > know might help someone figure out the issue for me, but my real > question is, does anyone know of a length limitation on the table > field's qualification and does external impact that at all? > > Any advice or guidance on this would help. It is mostly for us to > decide if we have to rewrite that process now (urgently) or later (not > the issue). > > Thanks all, > > Brian Goralczyk > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > > > ___ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years" > ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Table field qualification length restrictions
Sorry, I should have asked my question differently. I meant to say, did you TEST the same qualification in a simple advanced search to see if it works that way. I was just curious... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Brian Goralczyk Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 12:05 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Table field qualification length restrictions ** Lisa, I could certainly complete the process another way. But since this is an a current issue I am not looking to redesign it unless I have to. That is why I am asking about a limitation in the field length of the qualification rather than how to redesign it. And the error isn't a Remedy telling me the field is too long error. It is more obscure. This request is more to see if anyone else has ran into a length issue and might know what it is. But thank you for the suggestion. Brian Goralczyk On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Kemes, Lisa A DLA CTR INFORMATION OPERATIONS wrote: Can you do this same qualification in a simple search or do you get the same error. Maybe show us the qualification as well. Lisa -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Brian Goralczyk Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 10:37 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table field qualification length restrictions ** I have an issue that I am tracking down and I think a possible point of issue is the table field qualification. We are using a text field that is a compilation of data. We are then doing a "contains" qualification check against that field. When we hit a field length of just under 2000 characters ( I know that is a lot ) it seems to give an obscure error. I don't have the error in front of me so I can't include it, which I know might help someone figure out the issue for me, but my real question is, does anyone know of a length limitation on the table field's qualification and does external impact that at all? Any advice or guidance on this would help. It is mostly for us to decide if we have to rewrite that process now (urgently) or later (not the issue). Thanks all, Brian Goralczyk _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years" _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Table field qualification length restrictions
While I don't know of a limit off hand there may be one depending on your database (some databases do have a limit to the size of the where clause) Having the actual error (and what db you are on) would allow someone to give you a definitive answer Fred From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Brian Goralczyk Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 11:05 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Table field qualification length restrictions ** Lisa, I could certainly complete the process another way. But since this is an a current issue I am not looking to redesign it unless I have to. That is why I am asking about a limitation in the field length of the qualification rather than how to redesign it. And the error isn't a Remedy telling me the field is too long error. It is more obscure. This request is more to see if anyone else has ran into a length issue and might know what it is. But thank you for the suggestion. Brian Goralczyk -Original Message- On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Kemes, Lisa A DLA CTR INFORMATION OPERATIONS wrote: Can you do this same qualification in a simple search or do you get the same error. Maybe show us the qualification as well. Lisa -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Brian Goralczyk Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 10:37 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> Subject: Table field qualification length restrictions ** I have an issue that I am tracking down and I think a possible point of issue is the table field qualification. We are using a text field that is a compilation of data. We are then doing a "contains" qualification check against that field. When we hit a field length of just under 2000 characters ( I know that is a lot ) it seems to give an obscure error. I don't have the error in front of me so I can't include it, which I know might help someone figure out the issue for me, but my real question is, does anyone know of a length limitation on the table field's qualification and does external impact that at all? Any advice or guidance on this would help. It is mostly for us to decide if we have to rewrite that process now (urgently) or later (not the issue). Thanks all, Brian Goralczyk ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Table field qualification length restrictions
Brian, There is no explicit limit to the size of an External qualification from the AR System side. Now, there could be limits of specific clauses from the DB or maybe there is something else going on. WIthout the error you are getting and determining where it is from, it is really difficult to help debug, but as far as AR System having some limit defined - there is NOT one (now, there is always the chance that there is an accidental limit - i.e. bug - but I don't know of anything in this area and have not heard from any customers about a limit). If you could get the actual error message, it would help tremendously. Doug From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Brian Goralczyk Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 7:37 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Table field qualification length restrictions ** I have an issue that I am tracking down and I think a possible point of issue is the table field qualification. We are using a text field that is a compilation of data. We are then doing a "contains" qualification check against that field. When we hit a field length of just under 2000 characters ( I know that is a lot ) it seems to give an obscure error. I don't have the error in front of me so I can't include it, which I know might help someone figure out the issue for me, but my real question is, does anyone know of a length limitation on the table field's qualification and does external impact that at all? Any advice or guidance on this would help. It is mostly for us to decide if we have to rewrite that process now (urgently) or later (not the issue). Thanks all, Brian Goralczyk _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Table field qualification length restrictions
Doug, Thank you sir. That is the answer I was looking for. I am just knocking out possible issues. I will look further. I wasn't 100% sure it was an issue with Remedy anyways. This helps confirm my suspicions and that is what I was looking for. Thank you. On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Mueller, Doug wrote: > ** > > Brian, > > > > There is no explicit limit to the size of an External qualification from > the AR System side. > > > > Now, there could be limits of specific clauses from the DB or maybe there > is something else going on. > > > WIthout the error you are getting and determining where it is from, it is > really difficult to help debug, but > > as far as AR System having some limit defined – there is NOT one (now, > there is always the chance that > > there is an accidental limit – i.e. bug – but I don't know of anything in > this area and have not heard from > > any customers about a limit). > > > > If you could get the actual error message, it would help tremendously. > > > > Doug > > > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Brian Goralczyk > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 27, 2013 7:37 AM > > *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > *Subject:* Table field qualification length restrictions > > > > ** > > I have an issue that I am tracking down and I think a possible point of > issue is the table field qualification. > > > > We are using a text field that is a compilation of data. We are then > doing a "contains" qualification check against that field. When we hit a > field length of just under 2000 characters ( I know that is a lot ) it > seems to give an obscure error. > > > > I don't have the error in front of me so I can't include it, which I know > might help someone figure out the issue for me, but my real question is, > does anyone know of a length limitation on the table field's qualification > and does external impact that at all? > > > > Any advice or guidance on this would help. It is mostly for us to decide > if we have to rewrite that process now (urgently) or later (not the issue). > > > > Thanks all, > > > > Brian Goralczyk > > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Date/Time in table field Qualification
Hi Listers, I am trying a basic qualification in the Table field 'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ both the fields are the Date/Time fields of a regular forms. when I run it it gives "ARERR [313] Data types are not appropriate for relational operation" but when I try 'create_date'<=$DATE$ it works fine, in this one is date/time and other is date field. I am clueless as what needs to be substituted for 'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ to work. I know this topic has been discussed lot of times in past, have gone through the archives but couldn't resolve it. Ankur ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Help with table field qualification!!!!!!!
** You could try creating a VIEW form of the table. Something like "select DISTINCT user_name from table". Then use that VIEW in your table field and add a qualification to filter your results.I don't believe there is any built in way of getting distinct values from a table in Remedy, unless you use a menu. On 7/17/06, Nisha RAMTRI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ** Hello All, I have a display only form which has a table field which gets data populated from some backend table. Now this backend table has multiple entries of a particular user/region and I want that only distinct values should be populated in the display-only table. How can this be achieved? How should the table qualification be built in this case? I tried using External with set fields in some char field as qualification but this did not get processed. Any ideas how it can be done?? Thanks. Warm Regards, Nisha Ramtri Remedy Development, ITAC, ST Microelectronics Ltd. Plot#1, Knowledge Park-III, Greater Noida. Ph# (0120)3916000 Extn:6247 PSTN# (0120)4006247 __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ -- Frank CarusoSpecific Integration, Inc.Senior Remedy Engineerwww.specificintegration.com703-376-1249 __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
Re: Help with table field qualification!!!!!!!
** Nisha, Create a view of the table you want to build this table field at the database level. Use this view to create a view form in Remedy and this View form for building the view. Hope this helps.. Joe - Original Message From: Nisha RAMTRI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGSent: Monday, July 17, 2006 8:25:19 AMSubject: Help with table field qualification!!!** Hello All, I have a display only form which has a table field which gets data populated from some backend table. Now this backend table has multiple entries of a particular user/region and I want that only distinct values should be populated in the display-only table. How can this be achieved? How should the table qualification be built in this case? I tried using External with set fields in some char field as qualification but this did not get processed. Any ideas how it can be done?? Thanks. Warm Regards, Nisha Ramtri Remedy Development, ITAC, ST Microelectronics Ltd. Plot#1, Knowledge Park-III, Greater Noida. Ph# (0120)3916000 Extn:6247 PSTN# (0120)4006247 __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
Re: Dynamic Table Field Qualification help
Kevin,
It makes complete sense. But I think your going about it backwards too. :)
The EXTERNAL() operator could be used like your suggesting, but you
will face the issues that you have. Or your Table qualification has to
know about "Select all" and "opt out" that portion of the
qualification. Something like:
'UserID' = $UserID$ AND ('Field1' = EXTERNAL($menu1$) OR $menu1$ = 3)
AND ('Field2' = EXTERNAL($menu2$) OR $menu2$ = 3) AND ('Field3' =
EXTERNAL($menu3$) OR $menu3$ = 3)
However if you ever have to add a new value to one of those menus then
life gets messy because you have to update the table field as well.
In stead of that I would suggestion the following approach.
Add a hidden display only field that you set with the values from the
three fields on menu choice of any of the three fields. ('zTableQual')
So three active links on "menu selection" for the fields to call this
guide. The guide sets 'zTableQual' based on the values in the three
fields. So the guide logic would be something like the following:
Guide #1: Set zTableQual
'zTableQual' = $NULL$
if ( $menu1$ != $NULL$ AND $menu1$ < 3)
'zTableQual' = ( 'Field1' = "$menu1$" )
if ( $menu2$ != $NULL$ AND $menu2$ < 3)
Call guide #2
'zTableQual' = 'zTableQual'+ ( 'Field2' = "$menu1$" )
if ( $menu3$ != $NULL$ AND $menu3$ < 3)
Call guide #2
'zTableQual' = 'zTableQual'+ ( 'Field3' = "$menu1$" )
Guide #2:
if ( 'zTableQual' != $NULL$ )
'zTableQual' = 'zTableQual'+ (" AND ")
Then the table qual would be:
'UserID' = $UserID$ AND EXTERNAL($zTableQual$)
If you logic changes for any of the three fields then just update
Guide1 to "do the right thing" with the 'zTableQual' string that you
build and your done.
If you even want to allow the user to specify "OR"s instead of "AND"s
you could do that too. (and maybe even get fancy enough to let them
set parenthesees around which parts would be OR'ed and which parts
would be AND'ed. too. :) And the table qual stays the same!
Yea it looks like "more work", but you also can choose to avoid OR
conditions which can help with RDBMs performance in the long run.
Just my two cents.
--
Carey Matthew Black
Remedy Skilled Professional (RSP)
ARS = Action Request System(Remedy)
Solution = People + Process + Tools
Fast, Accurate, Cheap Pick two.
Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence.
On 8/8/06, Kevin R. Carmack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Greetings All,
I'm hoping someone can help with a table field qualification problem I've
been trying to figure out.
Form A has a table field that shows all entries from Form B where 'UserID'
on Form A = 'UserID' on Form B. I need to have 3 drop-down menus on Form
A that can be used to "filter" the table. The user should be able to
choose a value in any one of these menus to further refine the table field
qualification.
These menu fields are copies of fields from Form B with an extra option
added in the Attributes for "Show All." So, if the menu field on Form B
has values of 0, 1, and 2, the corresponding menu field on Form A will
have values of 0, 1, 2, and 3 with the 3 being "Show All."
If I use the EXTERNAL feature so that the table qualification is dynamic,
what happens if the user doesn't use the menus on Form A, or only chooses
a value other than "Show All" on 1 or 2 of them?
For example, I have the following qualification:
'UserID' = $UserID$ AND 'Field1' = EXTERNAL($menu1$) AND 'Field2' =
EXTERNAL($menu2$) AND 'Field3' = EXTERNAL($menu3$)
However, if the menu on Form A is "Show All" then I need the qualification
to ignore the 'Field' = EXTERNAL($menu$) bit of the qualification so that
it brings back all entries regardless of the value of 'Field'. Does this
make sense?
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at http://www.wwrug.org
Re: Date/Time in table field Qualification
Ankur, Make sure you are not comparing a Date field to a Date/Time field... Joe D'Souza Remedy Developer / Consultant, BearingPoint, Virginia. - Original Message From: Ankur Gulati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 7:25:37 AM Subject: Date/Time in table field Qualification ** Hi Listers, I am trying a basic qualification in the Table field 'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ both the fields are the Date/Time fields of a regular forms. when I run it it gives "ARERR [313] Data types are not appropriate for relational operation" but when I try 'create_date'<=$DATE$ it works fine, in this one is date/time and other is date field. I am clueless as what needs to be substituted for 'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ to work. I know this topic has been discussed lot of times in past, have gone through the archives but couldn't resolve it. Ankur Have a burning question? Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Date/Time in table field Qualification
Joe, Both are Date/Time fields. 'create_date' and $Start_Date$ Ankur On 12/13/06, Joe DeSouza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ** Ankur, Make sure you are not comparing a Date field to a Date/Time field... Joe D'Souza Remedy Developer / Consultant, BearingPoint, Virginia. - Original Message From: Ankur Gulati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 7:25:37 AM Subject: Date/Time in table field Qualification ** Hi Listers, I am trying a basic qualification in the Table field 'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ both the fields are the Date/Time fields of a regular forms. when I run it it gives "ARERR [313] Data types are not appropriate for relational operation" but when I try 'create_date'<=$DATE$ it works fine, in this one is date/time and other is date field. I am clueless as what needs to be substituted for 'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ to work. I know this topic has been discussed lot of times in past, have gone through the archives but couldn't resolve it. Ankur -- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=45083/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta> __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Date/Time in table field Qualification
Ankur I've seen this before. The issue results from comparing a date/time field with a date field. I have workflow that takes the date field and sets a date/time field (display field). Dave -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wireless) - Original Message - From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Wed Dec 13 07:25:37 2006 Subject: Date/Time in table field Qualification ** Hi Listers, I am trying a basic qualification in the Table field 'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ both the fields are the Date/Time fields of a regular forms. when I run it it gives "ARERR [313] Data types are not appropriate for relational operation" but when I try 'create_date'<=$DATE$ it works fine, in this one is date/time and other is date field. I am clueless as what needs to be substituted for 'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ to work. I know this topic has been discussed lot of times in past, have gone through the archives but couldn't resolve it. Ankur __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
Re: Date/Time in table field Qualification
Resending this reply again. Looks like it didn't get to the list for some reason. Dave -Original Message- From: Shellman, David Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 8:09 AM To: 'arslist@ARSLIST.ORG' Subject: Re: Date/Time in table field Qualification Ankur I've seen this before. The issue results from comparing a date/time field with a date field. I have workflow that takes the date field and sets a date/time field (display field). Dave -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wireless) - Original Message - From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Date/Time in table field Qualification
I think you'ld get that error whenever $Start_Date$ is NULL. You wouldn't get any error when $Start_Date$ has a valid date/time value. So, you'ld have to make sure that $Start_Date$ always has a value. If null, give it a default value like '1-Jan-1970'. (provided you're using this qualification directly in the Table Property-> Qualification) OR You may also get this error if you're building the qualification string dynamically using the EXTERNAL keyword. In that case you may want to use double-quotes around $Start_Date$. Thanks Radhika Direct : +44 20718 20262 Extn : 20262 -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ankur Gulati Sent: 13 December, 2006 7:34 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Date/Time in table field Qualification ** Joe, Both are Date/Time fields. 'create_date' and $Start_Date$ Ankur On 12/13/06, Joe DeSouza < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ** Ankur, Make sure you are not comparing a Date field to a Date/Time field... Joe D'Souza Remedy Developer / Consultant, BearingPoint, Virginia. - Original Message From: Ankur Gulati < <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 7:25:37 AM Subject: Date/Time in table field Qualification ** Hi Listers, I am trying a basic qualification in the Table field 'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ both the fields are the Date/Time fields of a regular forms. when I run it it gives "ARERR [313] Data types are not appropriate for relational operation" but when I try 'create_date'<=$DATE$ it works fine, in this one is date/time and other is date field. I am clueless as what needs to be substituted for 'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ to work. I know this topic has been discussed lot of times in past, have gone through the archives but couldn't resolve it. Ankur _ Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=45083/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta> __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Date/Time in table field Qualification
David
Both are Date/Time Fields
and radhika I did check regarding any NULL values in $Start_Date$, but
there are none.
Ankur
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Narayanan, Radhika
Sent: 13 December 2006 15:21
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Date/Time in table field Qualification
**
I think you'ld get that error whenever $Start_Date$ is NULL. You
wouldn't get any error when $Start_Date$ has a valid date/time value.
So, you'ld have to make sure that $Start_Date$ always has a value. If
null, give it a default value like '1-Jan-1970'. (provided you're using
this qualification directly in the Table Property-> Qualification)
OR
You may also get this error if you're building the qualification string
dynamically using the EXTERNAL keyword. In that case you may want to use
double-quotes
around $Start_Date$.
Thanks
Radhika
Direct : +44 20718 20262
Extn : 20262
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ankur Gulati
Sent: 13 December, 2006 7:34 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Date/Time in table field Qualification
** Joe,
Both are Date/Time fields.
'create_date' and $Start_Date$
Ankur
On 12/13/06, Joe DeSouza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
**
Ankur,
Make sure you are not comparing a Date field to a
Date/Time field...
Joe D'Souza
Remedy Developer / Consultant,
BearingPoint,
Virginia.
- Original Message
From: Ankur Gulati < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 7:25:37 AM
Subject: Date/Time in table field Qualification
** Hi Listers,
I am trying a basic qualification in the Table field
'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ both the fields are the Date/Time fields of
a regular forms.
when I run it it gives "ARERR [313] Data types are not
appropriate for relational operation"
but when I try 'create_date'<=$DATE$ it works fine, in
this one is date/time and other is date field.
I am clueless as what needs to be substituted for
'create_date'<=$Start_Date$ to work.
I know this topic has been discussed lot of times in
past, have gone through the archives but couldn't resolve it.
Ankur
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=45083/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/m
ailbeta>
__20060125___This posting was
submitted with HTML in it___
__20060125___This posting was submitted with
HTML in it___
This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended
recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential
information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be
copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are
not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and
any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.
__20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
Re: Dynamic Table Field Qualification help (RESOLVED)
It's amazing what a fresh pair of eyes will do. :) As usual, I was over-complicating the issue and while I didn't use your exact solution, it did jog a few brain cells into action and it now works exactly as I intended. Thank you very much! ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at http://www.wwrug.org
Re: Dynamic Table Field Qualification help (RESOLVED)
My apologies for not listing the solution I used earlier. I've not used
the ARSList before so I'm afraid I may make some "newbie" mistakes.
Someone kindly advised me of the proper etiquette. Here's what I came up
with:
The requirement from management was that a user can choose any one of the
three menu options, but not necessarily all of them, or any of them, and
in no particular order. I tried to employ your solution, but couldn't get
it to work the way I wanted, but your idea of using a guide prompted me to
call the guide when a user clicks a refresh button. The menu options will
never change (if they did, the whole reason for having them in the first
place would change and that would affect lots of things) and workflow
guarantees they cannot be NULL.
The table qualification is 'UserID' = $UserID$ AND EXTERNAL
($yTmpTableQual$) {I use yTmp to distinguish between Remedy-created temp
fields and my own}
The AL's in the guide are as follows:
AL1
Set yTmpTableQual to NULL
AL2
If all 3 menus = "Show All", pop a message advising the user to choose one
or more menu options.
AL3
If menu1 < "Show All", set yTmpTableQual to ( 'Field1' = "$menu1$" ).
AL4
If menu2 < "Show All", and yTmpTableQual != NULL, set yTmpTableQual to
yTmpTableQual + " " + "AND" + " " + ( 'Field2' = "$menu2$" ).
AL5
If menu2 < "Show All", and yTmpTableQual = NULL, set yTmpTableQual to
( 'Field2' = "$menu2$" )
AL6
If menu3 < "Show All", and yTmpTableQual != NULL, set yTmpTableQual to
yTmpTableQual = " " + "AND" + " " + ( 'Field3' = "$menu3" )
AL7
If menu3 < "Show All", and yTmpTableQual = NULL, set yTmpTableQual to
( 'Field3' = "$menu3$" )
AL8
Refresh table
It may not be as elegant as it could be, but it works perfectly, and with
no performance problems. Thanks again for your help!
Best regards,
Kevin
___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at http://www.wwrug.org
