Hi Norm
I don't understand your objection. A company is only 'atomic' if it is a
singular unit for all attributes, including permissions. If it is not, then
you need to consider the organizational sub-units that ARE atomic as your
'company' records.
In all likelihood, if you are dealing with
the atomic-ness of the Company field.
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Sanders
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 2:26 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
Hi Norm
I don't understand
System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 3:08 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
I think, perhaps, folks are misunderstanding my use of the term
atomic. Atomic, from
Norm,
I am not sure I understand your objection to the suggested approach.
Each company (no mater what you call them) are atomic.
The point is that if you need a hierarchy of companies then what you
need to do is what Chris described. You call each independent data set
a company and if some of
Has anyone attempted to implement multitenancy in a large, complex
enterprise? Suppose I have a very large company called Acme
Incorporated, and let's say Acme actually consists of multiple
quasi-independent subsidiaries-Widgets, Sprockets, and Gizmos.
Let's say Widgets, Sprockets, and Gizmos
.
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96
CS/SCCE
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 1:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
**
Has anyone attempted to implement
System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96
CS/SCCE
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 1:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
**
Has anyone attempted to implement multitenancy in a large,
complex
at Austin
512.232.7513
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Rentfrow
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 1:32 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
There is no way
is geographically separated.
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 1:39 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
Norm,
The easiest way I
: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
There is no way to do this without custom coding. However, it can be
done. We are currently doing this exact thing for a customer utilizing
dynamic groups.
We are doing it a level above where you are asking for it but there is
no reason it couldn't be done
Norm E CIV USAF 96
CS/SCCE
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 1:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
**
Has anyone attempted to implement multitenancy in a large, complex
enterprise? Suppose I have a very large company called Acme
Incorporated, and let's say Acme
: Re: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
Ok...maybe I'm being a little too simplistic here, but why don't you
just set up the following 12 companies:
Widgets Research
Widgets Development
Widgets Testing
Widgets Contracting
Sprockets Research
@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
**
That would make the value no longer atomic. That's not
acceptable per my requirement.
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96
CS/SCCE
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 1:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
**
Has anyone attempted to implement multitenancy in a large, complex
enterprise? Suppose I have a very large company called
of North Texas Computing Center
http://remedy.unt.edu/helpdesk/
_
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 2:19 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
**
When
area, not the company. It allows for much
greater flexibility.
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of strauss
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 2:30 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Multitenancy in a Large
System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96
CS/SCCE
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 3:07 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
**
It just doesn't seem very robust to me. The system we're using today
(not ITSM
, 2007 3:24 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Multitenancy in a Large Enterprise
If you are willing to customize, you can of course do much more. Axton
customized our existing production Help Desk 5.5.1 to add row-level
locking on several different aspects of the application, ranging from
18 matches
Mail list logo
