Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
Hi, If we are on the topic of the Entry ID creation, I have some definite ideas. Nowadays, entry ids can be allocated in blocks, and there might be holes in the list when ids are skipped. The nextid for the form can be stepped forward even when the submit fails. This is actually the default behavior in 7.6.04. My idea is to have a form-specific check-box to reserves the entry id BEFORE the filter processing starts. We could also allow admins to get the unique entry id from the server via an ACTL by doing a set-fields RequestID = GETRESERVENEXTENTRYID($SCHEMA$). Nothing bad can come of this, as the uniqueness of the entry id is controlled by the database anyhow. All the safeguards are already in place. 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. Not having the Entry ID before submit is why GUIDs are used. I can't think of case where I was not able to use a GUID to work around the Entry ID not being available before submit. As much as I love new features and flexibility I think Misi is on to something here. Adding phase overriding at the action level would be powerful and could also be a support nightmare. Typically splitting the action into it's own filter does the job without adding another layer of complexity to all filters. Jason On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Joe Martin D'Souza jdso...@shyle.netwrote: 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: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Rod Harris Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 7:14 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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
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: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Rod Harris Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 7:14 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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
Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
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: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Rod Harris Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 7:14 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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
Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
Not having the Entry ID before submit is why GUIDs are used. I can't think of case where I was not able to use a GUID to work around the Entry ID not being available before submit. As much as I love new features and flexibility I think Misi is on to something here. Adding phase overriding at the action level would be powerful and could also be a support nightmare. Typically splitting the action into it's own filter does the job without adding another layer of complexity to all filters. Jason On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Joe Martin D'Souza jdso...@shyle.netwrote: 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: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Rod Harris Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 7:14 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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
Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
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. 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 On 9 December 2011 04:51, Brittain, Mark mbritt...@navisite.com 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* mbritt...@navisite.com Office: 315-453-2912 x5335 Mobile: 315-317-2897 ** ** -- This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. _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
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 On 12 December 2011 16:32, Misi Mladoniczky m...@rrr.se 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. 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 On 9 December 2011 04:51, Brittain, Mark mbritt...@navisite.com 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* mbritt...@navisite.com Office: 315-453-2912 x5335 Mobile: 315-317-2897 ** ** -- This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. _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
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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Rod Harris Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 7:14 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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* mbritt...@navisite.com 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
Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
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: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Rod Harris Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 7:14 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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* mbritt...@navisite.com 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 ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
Thanks everyone for your responses. Personally I prefer to go with the Perform-Action-Apply when saving the current window. Maybe because it is newer. Mark From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 10:28 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY ** True Commit Changes does that too, though personally I have started to use the Perform-Action-Apply for creating workflow for submits and searches as soon as it got available in version 6.3 I think.. Commit Changes should not however be confused with the ‘commit transaction’ in T-SQL or a ‘commit’ in Oracle as was by Mark following his SQL – at least that was my understanding of what he was attempting to do A Direct SQL once run from the Direct SQL action, is automatically followed by a commit when necessary. Joe From: LJ LongWingmailto:lj.longw...@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 5:32 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY ** Joe….that is ‘one’ of the things the Commit Changes does….when you are NOT in a dialog window, for example in a search window, the commit changes action performs the search, if in a submit window, it creates the record…if in a modify window it saves changes…so I think they ‘kinda do the same thing’ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 2:55 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY ** If you have a direct SQL query in your workflow, you do not need to use either of these after the Query. The AR Server performs the commit after the successful execution of that query wherever a commit is required (in case of insert, update or delete). Perform-Action-Apply is used for submitting in a submit or modify window and search in a search window while commit changes is used to push the values from a child window in a dialog box operation to the parent window after the child is closed, on fields where there was a mapping on window close between the parent and child window.. Joe From: Brittain, Markmailto:mbritt...@navisite.com Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 3:51 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY ** 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 mbritt...@navisite.commailto:mbritt...@navisite.com Office: 315-453-2912 x5335 Mobile: 315-317-2897 This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://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
Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
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 mbritt...@navisite.com Office: 315-453-2912 x5335 Mobile: 315-317-2897 This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
Joe….that is ‘one’ of the things the Commit Changes does….when you are NOT in a dialog window, for example in a search window, the commit changes action performs the search, if in a submit window, it creates the record…if in a modify window it saves changes…so I think they ‘kinda do the same thing’ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 2:55 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY ** If you have a direct SQL query in your workflow, you do not need to use either of these after the Query. The AR Server performs the commit after the successful execution of that query wherever a commit is required (in case of insert, update or delete). Perform-Action-Apply is used for submitting in a submit or modify window and search in a search window while commit changes is used to push the values from a child window in a dialog box operation to the parent window after the child is closed, on fields where there was a mapping on window close between the parent and child window.. Joe From: Brittain, Mark mailto:mbritt...@navisite.com Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 3:51 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY ** 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 mbritt...@navisite.com Office: 315-453-2912 x5335 Mobile: 315-317-2897 _ This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _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
Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
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 On 9 December 2011 04:51, Brittain, Mark mbritt...@navisite.com 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* mbritt...@navisite.com Office: 315-453-2912 x5335 Mobile: 315-317-2897 ** ** -- This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. _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
Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
True Commit Changes does that too, though personally I have started to use the Perform-Action-Apply for creating workflow for submits and searches as soon as it got available in version 6.3 I think.. Commit Changes should not however be confused with the ‘commit transaction’ in T-SQL or a ‘commit’ in Oracle as was by Mark following his SQL – at least that was my understanding of what he was attempting to do A Direct SQL once run from the Direct SQL action, is automatically followed by a commit when necessary. Joe From: LJ LongWing Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 5:32 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY ** Joe….that is ‘one’ of the things the Commit Changes does….when you are NOT in a dialog window, for example in a search window, the commit changes action performs the search, if in a submit window, it creates the record…if in a modify window it saves changes…so I think they ‘kinda do the same thing’ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 2:55 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY ** If you have a direct SQL query in your workflow, you do not need to use either of these after the Query. The AR Server performs the commit after the successful execution of that query wherever a commit is required (in case of insert, update or delete). Perform-Action-Apply is used for submitting in a submit or modify window and search in a search window while commit changes is used to push the values from a child window in a dialog box operation to the parent window after the child is closed, on fields where there was a mapping on window close between the parent and child window.. Joe From: Brittain, Mark Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 3:51 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY ** 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 mbritt...@navisite.com Office: 315-453-2912 x5335 Mobile: 315-317-2897 This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _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
