I do something similar too by using the first number to denote where its coming from (AL or Filter), the next couple of numbers for which form, and the last few for the actual error messages.. Its a bit tricky when it comes to shared workflow though so I have narrowed down to using the primary form number for shared workflow...
Joe -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rick Cook Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:56 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Error - ARERR 1631155 ** Yeah, for messages in my own workflow, I use a numbering scheme that tells me (in the ARERR #) whether it was generated by an Active Link or Filter, the severity, and what the run order is. Makes finding the source workflow a TON easier. Now that we have more than 5 digits to play with, one could add numeric representations of applications to that sequence as well. Rick On 7/12/07, Joe D'Souza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ** 10000 should have been a decent number for their system as well as core applications and out of the box application error messages I would think.. I've always wished they had the ability of character prefixes to error messages. It would have been nice to have a Sales order system error messages to start with SOS123456. That would also mean you could reuse that error message number for a Bug tracking system BTS123456... Its not something I would kill for hence didn't really submit an enhancement request for it. But considering the size that these systems seem to be growing to it might sooner or later begin to look like a practical idea to be able to prefix error messages with a character prefix.. Rgds Joe -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Davies, J.T. Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 1:08 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Error - ARERR 1631155 ** If you think about it..."system" messages are less than 10,000. (i.e. 93 - unable to connect) Workflow errors are above 10,000... BMC/Remedy wouldn't be able to keep all their system and workflow errors below 10,000...(there aren't enough numbers if they used a unique number for every error!) ha ha :) J.T. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:28 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Error - ARERR 1631155 ** That's a good 'assumption' to make based on what they say they do during their application development.. but with some of the recent inconsistencies I have seen within their development work especially around the ITSM 7 apps, I wouldn't bet on it.. In fact PBM:PBI:CloseToOther_155 is the filter that throws that message.. Its a BMC filter.. Hope that helps.. Joe -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Pargeter, Christie Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 11:18 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Error - ARERR 1631155 ** One quick note...Remedy makes sure that all system error messages are less than 10,000. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
