Sometimes I wish BMC changed this field ID structure just a weeeee bit.. Instead of having just numerical ID’s, they modified their internal meta data structure a bit that Field ID’s could accommodate characters as well.. Then you could actually have meaningful Field ID’s instead of having to come up with some sort of code to choosing your next Field ID.. Reserved ranges could still be retained doing this and may even have the flexibility to designing ‘Keyword’ kind of reserved fields. It just may open up more possibilities..
Joe From: Jason Miller Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: [email protected] Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? ** I agreed that it takes more work to keep track of your field IDs but the consistency pays off later. I brought back a numbering scheme when I returned to my current employer. We have have been using it now for 3 years and it is paying off on how easy it is to share common workflow and "foundation" forms. The trick is to get into the habit of keeping track of the last used field ID for the type of field you and adjusting the ID before you save a new field. Being able to sort on Field ID/Name in Dev Studio helps as well as ARUtilities provides a quick list (and is easy to copy the field number to the clipboard). There have been a few POCs where we have created rapid prototypes using the default IDs and then later when we got the go ahead for the project used archgid and a CSV file exported from ARUtilities. Here are the number ranges we use. Range Type Starting Ending # of Fields Dynamic Group Fields 60001 N/A Data Fields (Saved) 600010001 600016999 6998 Shared Data Fields (Saved) 600017001 600018999 1998 Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019001 600019699 698 Shared Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019701 600019999 298 Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998 Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 600029999 2998 Views 600100000 N/A Groups 1200000 1299999 99999 We also have a fairly long list of common field such as First Name <600018048>, Last Name <600018049>, Serial Number <600017503>, zTmpCharVar01 <600019701>, zTmpIntVar01 <600019721>, txtHeader <600027008>, etc. Right now it is just a spreadsheet but I have been wanting to make it a Remedy app for a while. What would be really cool is to integrate the app with Dev Studio so it automatically picks the next ID based on the field type. :) Jason On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Susan Palmer <[email protected]> wrote: ** David, Personally I'd stay out of the less than 600000000 range simply because that is BMC's range. One never knows what the future brings. And even though your custom forms may never be 'in' a BMC Application you may want to use them inconjunction with one and you don't want any gotchas from the past biting you in the ###. When I first started this implementation 9 years ago I thought it would nice to know where the 'home' location of a field (what form) was and I assigned ID's based on the field's 'home' location so that I knew the origination of the data. But whatever plan you decide on it just needs to be uniform so you can maintain your sanity. It's all just good practice and establishing a habit. Good luck, Susan On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Durling <[email protected]> wrote: ** Thanks Mike & Susan, So it sounds like the 536xxxxxx-599xxxxxx range is not reserved for any special use. Rather, it’s just that 600xxxxxx-999999999 is a convenient range to maintain custom IDs in that is unlikely to be auto-assigned by the system (unless someone actually added enough IDs to reach 600000000). This is a one-developer custom setup, and I am trying to weigh the advantage of me manually assigning IDs over the convenience of letting ARS do it. I have run into the situation where trying to map a push fields or something was tedious because I had not kept consistent use of field ids (so I couldn’t just match based on ID), so I do see that advantage. David David Durling University of Georgia From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike) Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 10:07 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? ** I agree - we don’t have 399,999,999 fields (closer to 22K). No problem with the number of possible Field IDs. Not even close. Mike White EMail [email protected] Office 813.978.2192 From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Susan Palmer Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:53 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? ** I want to know who is going to use more fields than range 600000000 through 999999999 can provide! Even for BMC that might be a challenge. Since we're a custom shop I always make sure the field ID for fields used on multiple forms are the same. ARUtilities helps me easily see what field ID is available across several forms. Susan On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:57 AM, White, Michael W (Mike) <[email protected]> wrote: We reserve ranges of field IDs (> 600M) by application to avoid conflict and preserve ability to share workflow later. 536M range (system-generated) is risky in this regard. Two different kinds of fields on two different forms could be assigned the same id. Later copying/pasting a field onto a new form, such as to add functionality to the new form, could conflict if the id is already in-use. Record ID is always Field ID 1. Similarly, where we have to keep instances of a kind of field (Nodename, Site-ID, and many others in our case), we use the same Field ID. We use a cross-reference product to plan for changes, which reserved Field IDs helps with (as do field naming conventions). We can easily find like fields by their ID or name. Mike White EMail [email protected] Office 813.978.2192 -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David Durling Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community have chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting at the 536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a new form? According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be used for ARS 7.1 and 7.5. David Durling University of Georgia > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike) > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > "I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom > development.". > > We roll our own and use that range. > > Mike White > EMail [email protected] > Office 813.978.2192 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > "One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ." > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers larger > than that stump me. :) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > Huh. I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the issue. I > seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom > development. Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I don't > recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000. > > Jennifer Meyer > Remedy Technical Support Specialist > State of North Carolina > Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM & > ITAM Services > Office: 919-754-6543 > ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000 > [email protected] > http://its.state.nc.us > > E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North > Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an > authorized State Official. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? > > Hello Listers, > ARS 7.6.03 > MS SQL Server 2005 > VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise > I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the > following response when I create fields. > "You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC > reserved range. Do you want to continue?" > I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved field ids > but outside? > Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message? > The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199 > > Thanks, > --- > John J. Reiser > Remedy Developer/Administrator > Senior Software Development Analyst > Lockheed Martin - MS2 > The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. > Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by me _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
