Re: [rt-users] DB performance
03.06.2010 17:23, rmp dmd wrote: Hi, Currently our RT DB is about 308M. Not much but with nagios alerts, production issues, customer problems, Im seeing the DB growing quickly. I need to make sure that DB will not affect the RT performance. Kindly help on how I can check DB integrity, and make sure that DB will not slow RT. The first question is: what db do you use? mysql/postgres/oracle? Different DBs requires different approaches. The second question is: what db do you use? The third and the rest of questions are rely on DB. -- Agnislav Onufrijchuk PortaOne, Inc., RT Developer Tel: +1-866-SIP VOIP (+1 866 747 8647) ext. 7670 PortaOne Booth 3H1-10, Hall 3 Canadian Pavilion @ CommunicAsia Singapore Expo, June 15-18, 2010 Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] hiding user list from other users
Hello, I have an RT v 2.6.1 installed on our server and have a question about users rights. We need for now to restrict some users to not see for them a list of another users registered at the RT both in proposed list to change owner, and in the search of users by an email or an other thing. But we didn't found out how to realize this in context of the installed RT. So quiestion is that does the RT support hiding user list from other users? If not, is any modern version of RT that does it? And finally how can we patch the installed RT to support the feature? Sincerely yours, Pavel Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Retain Cc's and BCc's while replying to the RT correspond mails.
Hi, How can I retain Cc's not necessarily with Bcc's while replying for the correspondence mails via RT as well using the email interface? Commandbyreference extension is also installed. I'm using CentOS5.3, RT 3.8.4, MySQL 5.0.45. Thanks Manohar Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Re being removed from Subject in Email
I did a quick search, and couldn't find anything on the list. We are seeing the following bug, and I'm wondering if anyone knows the fix: If the subject begins with Re the Re is removed from the email subject. So in RT the subject reads: Receiving - xx But the email with the update reads: [domain.com #XX]eiving - xxx Any ideas? Thanks! -Jennifer Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] winmail.dat help RT 3.8.7
We're having this issue where some e-mails coming into the helpdesk are not including their original attachments. Instead the ticket is including a winmail.dat file. I found this thread sent to the list which suggests some options, but I wanted to know if anyone has come up with any sort of walkthrough on how to implement them. Specifically, using a perl TNEF module to covert them before they go into the RT system? http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/rt/users/92786 Thanks, Juan Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Re being removed from Subject in Email
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 10:28:47AM -0400, Jennifer Koermer wrote: I did a quick search, and couldn't find anything on the list. We are seeing the following bug, and I'm wondering if anyone knows the fix: If the subject begins with Re the Re is removed from the email subject. So in RT the subject reads: Receiving - xx But the email with the update reads: [domain.com #XX]eiving - xxx Looks like this is on Comment notifying AdminCcs ? If you're seeing it on other mails, you should provide the Message-ID so we can work out what scrip/template is causing it. -kevin pgppkVgTXL5EQ.pgp Description: PGP signature Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Re being removed from Subject in Email
I think you might be correctI did not notice that it appeared to be
happening on comments.
This is was the first line from the template Admin Comment:
Subject: [Comment] {my $s=($Transaction-Subject||$Ticket-Subject); $s
=~ s/\[Comment\]//g; $s =~ s/^Re//i; $s;}
I changed it to the following:
Subject: [Comment] {my $s=($Transaction-Subject||$Ticket-Subject); $s
=~ s/\[Comment\]//g; $s =~ s/^Re\://i; $s;}
Appears to be working great now. Thanks!
-Jennifer
-Original Message-
From: rt-users-boun...@lists.bestpractical.com
[mailto:rt-users-boun...@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Kevin
Falcone
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 11:50 AM
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] Re being removed from Subject in Email
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 10:28:47AM -0400, Jennifer Koermer wrote:
I did a quick search, and couldn't find anything on the list.
We are seeing the following bug, and I'm wondering if anyone knows
the fix:
If the subject begins with Re the Re is removed from the email
subject.
So in RT the subject reads: Receiving - xx
But the email with the update reads: [domain.com #XX]eiving -
xxx
Looks like this is on Comment notifying AdminCcs ?
If you're seeing it on other mails, you should provide the Message-ID so
we can work out what scrip/template is causing it.
-kevin
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Forward template broken in 3.8.6+
Does RT no longer respect the forward template? I had one from 3.8.2,
and I seem to recall it working fine.
Ours is pretty basic, just a (fairly obvious) note telling people to
ignore what they don't understand, since
forwards are generally to those not using the system, and some people
freak out when they get a message
with unfamiliar terminology, etc. Today I was trying to amend it to
include the requestor's email address
(again, recipients are not int he system, and the attached
transactions omit this!)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
RT-Attach-Message: yes
X-Template: Custom
This message has been forwarded from CEA ticket #{ $Ticket-id },
transaction #{ $Transaction-id }.
Don't worry if you do not know what this means, simply enjoy the
message below from { $Ticket-RequestorAddresses }
But whether I forward a transaction or whole ticket, neither the
custom header nor the body is included...
--
Cambridge Energy Alliance: Save money. Save the planet.
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Forward template broken in 3.8.6+
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 12:46:29PM -0400, Jerrad Pierce wrote:
Does RT no longer respect the forward template? I had one from 3.8.2,
and I seem to recall it working fine.
3.8.6 added a second template, one for forwarding Tickets and one for
forwarding just a transaction.
-kevin
Ours is pretty basic, just a (fairly obvious) note telling people to
ignore what they don't understand, since
forwards are generally to those not using the system, and some people
freak out when they get a message
with unfamiliar terminology, etc. Today I was trying to amend it to
include the requestor's email address
(again, recipients are not int he system, and the attached
transactions omit this!)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
RT-Attach-Message: yes
X-Template: Custom
This message has been forwarded from CEA ticket #{ $Ticket-id },
transaction #{ $Transaction-id }.
Don't worry if you do not know what this means, simply enjoy the
message below from { $Ticket-RequestorAddresses }
But whether I forward a transaction or whole ticket, neither the
custom header nor the body is included...
--
Cambridge Energy Alliance: Save money. Save the planet.
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
pgpaHyKiPJZXo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] case insensitive searching in Content?
Hi, I'm preparing migration from RT 3.2.2 + Mysql 3.x to RT 3.8.8 + Mysql or Pg. I just discovered a problem with the case insensitive searching in the column Attachments.Content (longblob) while playing with a new RT instance. Ticket SQL query Content like 'outlook' on our current (old) RT instance, returns some result set. Column Content has data-type longtext in the old database schema, so every letter case combination are found. On a new testing platform RT 3.8.8 + Mysql only partial set of tickets is returned with the same query. I must to modify the query to Content like 'outlook' or Content like 'Outlook' at least to see the most of the tickets. On the other hand RT 3.8.8 + Pg has Content column data-type text, so case-insensitive searching works, but there is another issue with non UTF-8 attachments encoded in quoted-printable, but this is a minor problem. Pg database behaves better than Mysql in this aspect. Is there any intention to detach non textual data from the Content column into e.g. ContentB in future? Have anyone some knowledge or suggestion about this? Best Regards -- Zito Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Forward template broken in 3.8.6+
Thanks! found the Forward Ticket template, and the modifications work there, but even though I've updated the Forward template, I still get messages with the format specified in etc/initialdata: This is forward of transaction #178384 of a ticket #11761 Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Trouble with CommandByMail
To list,
I have a Custom Field defined as Fill in one wikitext area that isn't
getting updated with the entire value when I try to create a ticket using
CommandByMail. I have tried re-defining the CF as Fill in one text area.
In both situations, the value that ends up in the CF is only 58 characters
long, whereas I entered anywhere from 70 to 180. When I entered:
CF{Description}: Again, this content will see if all the words are carried
over to the custom field and if it will also wrap around or what it will do.
I hope it does it all.
I ended up with :
Again, this content will see if all the words are carried in the CF.
Can anyone help me with this?
Thanks in advance.
Kenn
LBNL
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Forward template broken in 3.8.6+
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 02:25:21PM -0400, Jerrad Pierce wrote: Thanks! found the Forward Ticket template, and the modifications work there, but even though I've updated the Forward template, I still get messages with the format specified in etc/initialdata: This is forward of transaction #178384 of a ticket #11761 That implies you should have an error in the logs, you're seeing the Parsing the template and building a mail failed, use a fallback code. Look in RT::Interface::Email -kevin pgp67jiLY2MVC.pgp Description: PGP signature Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Forward template broken in 3.8.6+
Hrmph, the template parser is mighty picky. It fails to compile:
This message has been forwarded from CEA ticket #{ $Ticket-id }
transaction #{ $Transaction-id }.
Don't worry if you do not know what this means, simply enjoy the
message below from { $Ticket-RequestorAddresses }
But without the spaces around the transaction (as in the initialdata,
but who'd have thought it was meaningful and not simply to squeeze
everything onto one line) it works fine:
This message has been forwarded from CEA ticket #{ $Ticket-id }
transaction #{$Transaction-id}.
Don't worry if you do not know what this means, simply enjoy the
message below from { $Ticket-RequestorAddresses }
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Error when upgrading 3.8.6 - 3.8.8
Running CentOS 5.5 - fully patched. Trying to upgrade from 3.8.6 to 3.8.8. # make upgrade . . . . All dependencies have been found. /opt/local/bin/ginstall -c -m 0755 -o root -g www -d /opt/rt3/etc make: /opt/local/bin/ginstall: Command not found make: *** [config-install] Error 127 # I can't find anything in the README or UPGRADING doc that would indicate why I am getting this. Thanks for any help. Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
