Let me interject something in here that you may not have been aware of. When enabling 'Allow multiple assign groups' you are in essence killing your performance. This is due to the fact that remedy will do a 'c112' LIKE %<groupid>$ ' type of search when performing searches on records. I believe an alternative may be the dynamic group fields that are in the range of 60000-60999. You obviously know how to read the manuals so I won't bore you with the specifics of how they work...but I would recommend trying to determine if you can use those instead. The only problem that I see with this approach is the 'every group that has ever been assigned a ticket' part...and I don't know if that is necessary in your situation...but either way this could work out in your favor...because instead of one field managing all of them...you could have a field for each category i.e. (assigned groups, child assigned workgroup)
-----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Broderick Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 3:30 PM To: [email protected] Subject: How to start using field 112 after 200k rows Please excuse this long post. I'm stuck and need another set of eyes. I have a feeling what I'm trying to do should not be as hard as it seems, but it's kickin' my butt right now. I need a sanity check on overall approach to do the following, and some advice on specific issues we are running into, before my head explodes. Problem: Management wants to change our security access model, including on existing 200k helpdesk records, including parent and child helpdesk records. Assignee Group field 112 has never been used here, but we now need to start restricting access according to the following rules: 1) On Submit - Login+ name, Submitted by Group ID, and Assigned Group ID, should be appended into field 112. 2) On Modify - If Assigned Group is changed, append new Assigned Group ID to 112 of Parent. Also append new Assigned Group ID of Parent to field 112 for any/all child tickets. 3) On Modify - If Login+ name is changed, add new Login+ to 112. 4) On Submit of Child Tickets - Append the Assigned Workgroup from the Child to field 112 for the Parent. The tricky part seems to be keeping the parent and child 112 fields in sync so the parents can still see the children, etc even if the children have different Assigned Groups. Also, it seems tricky because it's an append and not just a simple push and replace, and we can't wipe out what was there in 112, but must add to it. What I've Tried: First, for the 200k historical records, if I understand field 112 functionality, I'm thinking we can run an escalation to look up the Group ID from the Group table for existing records and put the Group ID into field 112. Then hopefully our reports will still work. For new submits, I'm thinking we can have filters append Login+ name, look up submitter Group ID and Assigned Group ID and append these to 112. As I understand it, we can use a " ; " delimiter and concatenate to do this. For submit of child tickets, I was thinking I could send an event and use an active link guide that refreshes the child table field on the parent, loop through the table field, get all the child group ids, and append them to the parent field 112. But this isn't working like I thought it should. I can't get the table refresh to fire in the right sequence. The log shows it doing everything else, then refreshing the table. Which is too late for my purposes. Interestingly, if I manually click on the table field and refresh it, the lookups and appends seem to put everything into 112 ok. But I can't get it to work automagically. I tried Remedy Support, and they were unable or unwilling to help, but instead referred me to this list... Hmmm. Has anyone ever been in this situation? Am I missing something obvious to anyone? I tried putting the table refresh in a separate active link with a lower execution order, but still no luck. How can I make an active link table refresh fire, then loop through to pick up the child group ids? I read about the `! trick for forcing filters to execute, but how can I force a table refresh from an active link? And does my overall approach seem on the right track? Forgive me if this is unclear, my brain is having a hard time with this one. Thanks for any help you can offer. Bill OCC Helpdesk 6.0 AR 6.3 ____________________________________________________________________________ ___ 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"
