I cant recall any other reasons from the past, besides the requirement of an
entry being committed to the database, either because you need its entry ID
available during the transaction, for the use of some other action. This
applies to the entry ID's created from Push Fields too.. You can get around
this 50% of the times as you pointed out by manipulating the order of
filters or the actions that are required post ID creation.. but at times you
hit a wall where its just not possible and you wished that there was a
little more control on phasing on a particular action in a filter..
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Misi Mladoniczky
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 3:36 AM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
Hi,
Why would you want different actions to run in different phases? Do you
have any good user case?
I would guess that the need arise very seldom.
In that case I think we can split the filter into two filters instead.
Adding granularity to what we can control, also makes the possibilities
for errors and mistakes much greater...
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.
While you'll brought out this idea, if at all BMC ever intends to change
the
way this works along the lines of your ideas, it would be even cooler if
they changed it in such a way that you could control the specific phase
you
would like each action within a filter to run after you check that check
box
to override default phasing.. options like Default to let the action run
on
the default phase, Phase 1, Phase 2 etc for every action in that Filter so
you could choose what action you would like the override..
That would probably add a lot more control than just saying - ok all
actions
run on phase 1 with the `! convention..
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Grooms, Frederick W
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 10:40 AM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
I had put in a RFE back in 2010 to change the `! into a "Phase Override"
radio button, but it was closed. I had suggested the radio
button/dropdown
so we could override the phase in all directions (I can see times where we
would want a filter to run in Phase 4, such as if we have to push to on
outside system after all processing is complete on a record)
Fred
-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rod Harris
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 7:14 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
** Yeah Misi,
I'm a bit surprised that the run process commands have grown so much
faster
than the actions. I guess it's quicker to develop features as Run Process
commands rather than have dev studio hold our hand and check the syntax
and
context on entry. I know that it wouldn't be practical to expect every run
process to be implemented as an action but for some of the very common
ones
it would make a lot of sense. A business time command would be nice. The
syntax on those process commands is darn tricky even for experts.
The other thing that has surprised me is that the odd `! naming convention
for overriding filter phasing has survived all these years. Surely it
would
be much nicer to have a simple check box field or something to indicate
this. It would be easy enough to phase out the old method over time and
just
auto set the new check box if the name ended in `!
I'm not a fan of the mechanics of a piece of code featuring in the name. I
think it should describe what it does rather than how it does it. If you
change how it does it then you have to change its name also. In Remedy
since
the name of an active link or filter etc. is the key you have a problem
with
version control if you keep changing the names of things. If you leave the
name the same despite changing how things are done then your naming
convention becomes compromised.
There's a lot I love about Remedy and it does keep getting better but I'd
like it if these couple of things were improved.
Rod Harris
-----Original Message-----
On 12 December 2011 16:32, Misi Mladoniczky wrote:
Hi,
I definitely vote for Commit Changes!
Why use the ugly Run-Process bla bla bla syntax, when you have an action
that does the same thing?
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.
-----Original Message-----
That's a good question Mark. I'm not aware of any differences that would
make one more efficient than the other. Personally I prefer to use the
"Commit Changes" as it seems cleaner to use this rather than one of many
run process commands.
Rod Harris
-----Original Message-----
On 9 December 2011 04:51, Brittain, Mark wrote:
HI All,****
Commit Changes vs. PERFORM ACTION APPLY. Is one better to use than the
other on ARS 6.3?****
I have one active link that populates data from a SQL query and a
second
active link to commit the changes. These were probably created under
ARS
3
or 4. The Commit Changes does the job but always looking to smart way
to
do
things.****
Thanks****
Mark ****
*Mark Brittain*
Remedy Developer****
*NaviSite - **A Time Warner Cable Company*
[email protected]****
Office: 315-453-2912 x5335****
Mobile: 315-317-2897****
** **
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
