I thought that’s how it was done but if this is really true, it may not be done at server level.
Another interesting thought would be that for that particular version, how would multi tenancy work if 112 is failing on the web? After all that’s the heart and soul of implementing multi tenancy.. I may have missed your earlier posts where you’ll mentioned your specific versions.. Could you’ll bring what versions you’ll are on up again? Cheers Joe From: David Sanders Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 5:22 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Setting the 112 field with a flow ** Sounds like a bug to me too – after all, the row level access control should be enforced at the server, not through the clients Dave David Sanders Solution Architect Enterprise Service Suite @ Work / e-ServiceSuite tel +44 1494 468980 mobile +44 7710 377761 email [email protected] web http://www.westoverconsulting.co.uk http://www.e-servicesuite.co.uk ITIL – SaaS – On Premise From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: 20 April 2012 21:51 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Setting the 112 field with a flow ** If it works on the WUT and not on the web and if you are certain your Mid-Tier recache has completed and worked, this sounds like a bug to me.. Did you contact BMC Support? What did they have to say about it. Joe From: John Atherly Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 4:03 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Setting the 112 field with a flow ** On mine yes I even deleted Tomcats tempoary cache files then restarted Tomcat and cleared out my PC cache. I could see other changes to the form so the recache worked. _____________________________________________________________________________________ John Atherly | APC by Schneider Electric | Information, Process & Organization (IPO) | Remedy Administrator / Developer Phone: +305-266-5005 ext. 237 | Email: [email protected] | Site: www.apc.com/ | Address: 703 Waterford Way, Suit 850, Miami, FL 33126 USA *** Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail "Joe Martin D'Souza" <[email protected]> Sent by: "Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)" <[email protected]> 04/20/2012 03:57 PM Please respond to [email protected] To [email protected] cc Subject Re: Setting the 112 field with a flow ** Did you recache the mid tier after creating that group and role? Joe From: Marek B. Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 9:47 AM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: [email protected] Subject: Setting the 112 field with a flow ** Hi, I'm dynamically setting permission to the record. User fires a workflow and sets the 112 field with the custom role name. In my application role name = group name. So I'm able to see that entry in database as: ;-1234567890; Also I can see it in the 112 field as : Role Name Request ID has permissions: Submitter and Role Name The weird situation is that a user which is assigned the role is able to see that request only from WUT client. Any web based client keeps on saying " No matching request (or no permission to requests) ..." Why the user can easily access that request from Windows Client and it's not accessible form web? Any help would be appreciated. Marek _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
<<image001.gif>>
