That shatters a long standing understanding I had about data driven
escalations. I had received this info at a Remedy training facility in
Bracknell in UK years ago, that you ought to help Escalations with Filters
triggered off modifications by the Escalation User in processing 2nd and 3rd
stage actions. I guess they were wrong when they instructed us so then..
That is one of the benefit that they explained of having Filters running
with a Run If of $USER$ = "AR_ESCALATOR" AND whatever else the rest of the
qualification may be.. The other benefit I'm guessing (I wasn’t told this
but it makes sense) is if you need to override filter phasing during the run
of an escalation..
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Misi Mladoniczky
Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2011 4:04 AM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Application-Query-Delete-Entry
Hi,
Filters triggered by an Escalation, either via Set-Fields or Push-Fields,
will ALWAYS be run in the same thread.
This has ALWAYS been the case.
Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)
Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11):
* RRR|License - Not enough Remedy licenses? Save money by optimizing.
* RRR|Log - Performance issues or elusive bugs? Analyze your Remedy logs.
Find these products, and many free tools and utilities, at http://rrr.se.
Now that you remind me, I actually remember discussing this once with
you..
I'll really need to log the workflow to see what thread processes the
filter
workflow when filters are executed triggered by the AR_ESCALATOR user.
I was told this in a performance tuning class years ago (version 4.0 - 4.5
days so probably 11 or 12 years ago) that you let escalations perform
first
stage actions, and leave any 2nd and 3rd stage actions (deletes, push
fields, notifications) to be performed by filters that are run using the
admin thread. Maybe the design was different back then? So this is
obsolete
now?
I wish I had a server to verify this :-)
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: LJ LongWing
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 2:18 PM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Application-Query-Delete-Entry
Joe,
I know this discussion comes up every once in awhile....but you and I seem
to differ in our opinions of how it works.
So...based on your statement below, having the escalation set a field, and
having a filter fire on that field being set, then performing the delete
will be 'faster' because of a 'fire and forget' type of mechanism?
I would argue that an action of delete within the escalation, and a
setfield
causing a filter to fire that causes the delete are 'the same', in that
the
escalation thread does not 'go onto the next record' till after the
filters
on the current record are done...so, in essence, the performance of either
action would be the same and the escalation thread would still be tied up
for exactly the same amount of time regardless
At least, that's my understanding :)
-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 11:33 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Application-Query-Delete-Entry
End Date as Linda pointed out should be a field on that form you are
searching for, represented by 'End Date' in the qualification and not $End
Date$..
That being said, LJ's suggestion is right..
The qualification should be in the Run If of the Escalation and the run
process should be
Application-Delete-Entry $SCHEMA$ $Request ID$
Having an Escalation with no Run If instructs it to be run over the entire
data table. You do not want to do that in case you have like a million or
more records in it.. It may probably hang the escalation thread waiting
for
it to complete..
Also a faster way to do it would be to 'mark that entry for deletion'
using
a tag on a field created for that. This would mean that the Escalation
would
do a single update to that table which is a faster operation that multiple
deletes and be done with it.. Create a filter that runs if the $USER$ is
AR_ESCALATOR and the flag for delete is set, to delete that entry. So on a
fairly large set of data, although the deletes are still potentially
happening triggered by that filter, the escalation thread has already
finished processing the escalation and is ready to take on a new job..
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: LJ LongWing
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 12:54 PM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Application-Query-Delete-Entry
Larry,
Your approach is a bit ‘off’. An escalation performs a search that
matches
your qualification, and then performs your action on ALL records that
match
that qualification. So in this case, I would expect your run-if
qualification to be
('Status' = "Past") and ($End Date$ < ($TIMESTAMP$ - (86400 * 180)))
Or, whatever qual you want to identify your specific records,
Then, from there, you will be modifying ‘that’ record…so you wouldn’t want
to then perform an Application-Query-Delete-Entry, you could simply
perform
an
Application-Delete-Entry $SCHEMA$ $Request ID$
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Larry Barnes
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 10:23 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Application-Query-Delete-Entry
**
Hello Listers,
I'm trying to learn how to delete records that are past and the End Date
is
more than 6 months prior to todays date. I built the escalation and when
I
run it nothing happens. Can someone point in the right directions with
the
Run Process syntax.
I'm using SQL 2008 and Windows 2008. ITSM is 7.5
The form I'm deleting from is: AP:Alternate
Run IF Qualification is: 'Status' = "Past" (also tried without
setting
a Run If Qualification)
Run Process is: Application-Query-Delete-Entry "AP:Alternate" ('Status'
=
"Past") and ($End Date$ < ($TIMESTAMP$ - (86400 * 180)))
I have also tried: Application-Query-Delete-Entry "AP:Alternate"
('Status' = "Past") and ($End Date$ < ($DATE$ - (86400 * 180)))
Thanks in advance for your time,
Larry B
_attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
