Not really because this is a FILTER and
not an Active Link.
My understanding of ‘Timestamps’
was… (including a quick re-read of the basic admin pdf which does not say
tooooo much about this)
Filters: TIMESTAMP will always equal
SERVERTIMESTAMP because it is executing on the server, and is not aware of the
client in any fashion.
Active Links: TIMESTAMP = Localized Time
at the client where-as SERVERTIMESTAMP = the server timestamp (not localized)
So to ensure I’m not loosing cranium
matter, I wrote a small test form with
- Button to trigger an AL
- Char 1 – char 255
- Char 2 – char 255
- Date/Time 1 – timestamp
- Date/Time 2 – timestamp
- Active Link: (on button click)
- Char 1 & Date/Time 1 =
TIMESTAMP
- Char 2 & Date/Time 2 = SERVERTIMESTAMP
- Filter (On Submit)
- Char 1 & Date/Time 1 =
TIMESTAMP
- Char 2 & Date/Time 2 = SERVERTIMESTAMP
So, since my PC is in the same timezone
(PST) with the server, I set it to Hawaii.
Active Link sets all timestamps = Hawaii
Time! – Including the SERVERTIMESTAMP!!!!
**
** I expected a 2 hour
difference in the timestamps!!!!
**
Submit sets all timestamps = Server Time
* As expected
So I adjusted the time by setting it 30
minutes ahead, but still in Hawaii.
Active Link sets all timestamps = Hawaii
Time! – Including the SERVERTIMESTAMP! But as expected there is the 30
minute difference between the servertime and pc time.
** As expected, but not
localized servertimestamp
Submit sets all timestamps = Server Time
** As expected
So enough with playing with the PC Time-zone,
so I set it to PST, and then tweaked the Remedy Time-zone in the client.
1). I noticed that oddly enough HAWAII is
missing from the selection! Guess Remedy/BMC does not expect to sell any ARS to
customers in HI!
2). Results were the same L
So that was a “fun test”,
however it still does not explain the base issue that the Create_Date Core
field is different than TIMESTAMP!
Thanks for the input!!!
Thanks-n-advance;
HDT Platform
Incident / Problem Manager & Architect
Robert Molenda
IT OS PA
Tel: +1 408 501 6310
Fax: +1 408 501 2410
Mobile: +1 408 472 8097
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quality
begins with your actions.
From: Action
Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joe DeSouza
Sent: Wednesday, September 27,
2006 6:59 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Server - Timestamp
Issues generating random values
Also have you tried
$SERVERTIMESTAMP$ instead of $TIMESTAMP$
Remedy Developer / Consultant,
-----
Original Message ----
From: Robert Molenda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 7:27:51 PM
Subject: Re: Server - Timestamp Issues generating random values
Good ideas, I thought about those as well, they happen
randomly through
the year, as well as randomly during the day.
The run-if on the filter has "no qualification" so it "always
runs" on
Submit, regardless if the field is empty or not.
We also have a act link on copy to new which nukes a bunch of fields we
do not want carried forward, and this is in the list as well.
Thanks-n-advance;
HDT Platform Incident / Problem Manager & Architect
Robert Molenda
IT OS PA
Tel: +1 408 501 6310
Fax: +1 408 501 2410
Mobile: +1 408 472 8097
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quality begins with your actions.
-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 3:07 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Server - Timestamp Issues generating random values
2 things come to mind
1. Are these records right around a Daylight Savings Time / Standard
Time change?
2. Could they be related to some Copy to New functionality?
#1 would give you values in both directions depending on Spring/Fall.
Fred
-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Molenda
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 4:47 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Server - Timestamp Issues generating random values
I am wondering if someone else has stumbled across this issue.
On a form, we created a "Create Date Copy" field and on Submit (no
run-if) a Filter will simply do a "Set Fields = $TIMESTAMP$" to this
field. This was done as a test to see how long the filters took to run,
and was never removed :-(
As you might expect, normally there is only a 0 or 1 second difference
between the core field and this copy.
However since 2003 (that would be ARS 4.5) through today (and we're on
6.3, with 5.1.2 in between) intermittently, this "Create Date Copy"
value will differ by HOURS. The majority of time in the past (Create
Date Copy < Create Date) but also a few in the future (Create Date Copy
> Create Date)
They are always HOURS (plus or minus one second, but that is close
enough for me to say hour) and never anything else odd. (like 30
minutes, etc)
Over the years we only have 252 entries that have this condition out of
966538 tickets, but it is very confusing.
Thansk
Thanks-n-advance;
HDT Platform Incident / Problem Manager & Architect Robert Molenda IT OS
PA
Tel: +1 408 501 6310
Fax: +1 408 501 2410
Mobile: +1 408 472 8097
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quality begins with your actions.
****VISIT US AT: www.infineon.com
<http://www.infineon.com/> *****
"This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be subject to
legal or some other professional privilege. They are intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s). If you are not the
named addressee(s) you must not use, disclose, retain or reproduce all
or any part of the information contained in this e-mail or any
attachments. Any unauthorised use or disclosure may be unlawful. If you
have received this e-mail by mistake, please inform the sender
immediately and delete it and all copies from your system and destroy
any hard copies of it."
________________________________________________________________________
_______
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at http://www.wwrug.org
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at http://www.wwrug.org
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___