Even though it's customizable by preference, it doesn't address the
issue of macros and ad hoc reports being possibly hosed...especially
because in this large, decentralized environment across a very large
area, it is not possible to know who does or will do ad hoc reporting.

What I'm currently experimenting with is something somewhat crude...I've
added a radio button called "Quick Search" on the form in question.  The
radio button is set to YES by default.  When the value is set to YES (or
unselected) a search will only yield tickets opened in the past 90 days.
For users who want to do ad hoc reporting or pull up older tickets for
legacy purposes, they can just set the "Quick Search" to NO.

Anyway, it works somewhat well but am hoping for other ideas for a
better solution.

-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Cook
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:56 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Unqualified Searches in Very Large Enterprises -- Thoughts,
Please

** 
That's the beauty of using the preference values - they can be set
differently - and enforced - at the user and/or group level.  That way,
you can leave the server value unlimited, but limit it dynamically at
the user level.

Rick


On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


        Yes...but the "limit the number of requests returned" approach
has that
        nasty tendency of messing up ad-hoc reports and macros, which
are done
        extensively in this environment.
        
        
        
        -----Original Message-----
        From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
        [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton
        Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:33 PM
        To: [email protected]
        Subject: Re: Unqualified Searches in Very Large Enterprises --
Thoughts,
        Please
        
        Some things that come to mind:
        - Force the use of a preference server, force the value of max
        returned entries to 1000 or the likes
        - Set a hard limit on the server for the max number of entries
        returned from a get...
        - Don't give users access to search regular forms (front-end
things
        with display only forms)
        
        Axton Grams
        
        On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96
CS/SCCE
        <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
        > **
        >
        > Hi everyone:
        >
        >
        >
        > I wanted to get everyone's take on this thorny issue...I know
this
        matter has
        > been discussed many times before, but I wanted to put a new
twist on
        it.
        >
        >
        >
        > Specifically, I wanted to get anyone and everyone's thoughts
on the
        problem
        > of unqualified searches in a large enterprise.  Specifically,
suppose
        the
        > following: Suppose you have a custom app being used in a very
large
        > environment.  Suppose in that environment you have established
a
        ticket
        > isolation system by setting hidden fields on the form on
SEARCH.
        Tickets
        > are isolated by every company within the enterprise.
        >
        >
        >
        > Now, each company has in excess of 150,000 tickets, and there
are 20
        > companies.  The problem is, techs are accidentally clicking
the SEARCH
        > button without any qualification...kicking off what is
*seemingly* an
        > unqualified search.  But the search is not truly unqualified
because
        fields
        > are getting set on SEARCH to effect the ticket isolation.  But
the
        problem
        > remains - such a search goes out and attempts to fetch
150,000+
        tickets.
        > Several techs accidentally doing this at once (we have 800+
techs, so
        the
        > possibility of techs doing this is pretty high) causes the
server to
        slow
        > way down.
        >
        >
        >
        > Thoughts on how to minimize this issue? Hopefully I've
described the
        problem
        > well enough.
        >
        >
        >
        > TIA,
        >
        > Norm
        >
        > __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the
Answers Are"
        > html___
        
        
________________________________________________________________________
        _______
        UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
        Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers
Are"
        
        
________________________________________________________________________
_______
        UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
        Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers
Are"
        


__Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
html___ 

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"

Reply via email to