Re: Reconciliation IDs
In the BMC.CORE:BMC_BaseRelationship and BMC.CORE:BMC_BaseElement forms. You might be able to do this quicker with SQL. Cheers Peter -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai Sent: 27 January 2009 21:44 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs Hey Guys, One more quick question if thats ok. My only problem now is that the relationships do not come over to C. Where should i set the Recon Ids back to 0 again so that i can make a fresh start? Thanks Sean Jiri Pospisil wrote: > > ++ > Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email > ++ > > Exactly, if you do not do it this way, the reconciliation engine cannot > merge the records correctly as it has no way to tell that entries in > dataset A, B and C actually represent an entry in the gold dataset, which > is then meant to get updated with the discovery data. > > Regards > Jiri > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai > Sent: 23 January 2009 15:39 > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs > > Jiri, > > Are you saying to first run an Identification job with A and B against the > gold dataset, this will set the Recon Ids, then merge them into the C > dataset and then into Gold. Wow i never thought of doing it like that, i > will give it a try now. > Thanks, > Sean > > > > > Jiri Pospisil wrote: >> >> ++ >> Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email >> ++ >> >> Sean, >> >> Is it possible that you do not identify CIs in datasets A and B against >> the golden dataset before merging them into C? >> I guess this would result in the behaviour you are experiencing. >> If not, can you give us description of all the steps in your process. >> >> On the note of merging to a temporary dataset before going to the Golden >> dataset, I personally follow this approach. >> The reason being is that I can compare the temporary merged dataset to >> the >> Golden one to see what the differences are. >> If there is far too many, it suggests that discovery data is not quite >> right and I just get rid of the discovery data and wait for the next run >> without touching/corrupting the Golden dataset. >> >> Regards >> Jiri Pospisil >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai >> Sent: 23 January 2009 04:05 >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs†>> >> Sorry i didnt answer your question fully. What is happening is that >> instead >> of updating the record in GOLD it is creating a new record. I never want >> to >> create a new record in Gold, i just want to update whats there, if it >> doesnt >> exist in Gold then i dont want to merge the record. If you said that it >> was >> a best practise to create a Staging dataset and merge to Gold how would >> this >> be possible as the staging dataset would always have a Recon ID? >> I really appreciate the help, >> Thanks, >> Sean >> >> >> >> >> >> P Romain ARSlist wrote: >>> >>> When you say it doesn't work what exactly is happening, or not >>> happening? >>> >>> If you are trying to merge a CI from C to golden where they have >>> different >>> recon ids then that will never work. >>> >>> >>> >>>> It should still work if you have written the job properly. If you need >>>> to >>>> you can do a modify all on the Base Element form and set the >>>> ReconcilliationIdentity to zero. >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message- >>>> From: Heanai >>>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >>>> Sent: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 2:38 pm >>>> Subject: Reconciliation IDs†>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> I am having a bit of an issue. I have two datasets A and B. I use the >>>> econciliation Engine to merge attributes of these two to C. This works >>>> ine. However when i try to Reconcile C to the Gold Dataset it doesn't >>>> work >>
Re: Reconciliation IDs
Hey Guys, One more quick question if thats ok. My only problem now is that the relationships do not come over to C. Where should i set the Recon Ids back to 0 again so that i can make a fresh start? Thanks Sean Jiri Pospisil wrote: > > ++ > Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email > ++ > > Exactly, if you do not do it this way, the reconciliation engine cannot > merge the records correctly as it has no way to tell that entries in > dataset A, B and C actually represent an entry in the gold dataset, which > is then meant to get updated with the discovery data. > > Regards > Jiri > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai > Sent: 23 January 2009 15:39 > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs > > Jiri, > > Are you saying to first run an Identification job with A and B against the > gold dataset, this will set the Recon Ids, then merge them into the C > dataset and then into Gold. Wow i never thought of doing it like that, i > will give it a try now. > Thanks, > Sean > > > > > Jiri Pospisil wrote: >> >> ++ >> Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email >> ++ >> >> Sean, >> >> Is it possible that you do not identify CIs in datasets A and B against >> the golden dataset before merging them into C? >> I guess this would result in the behaviour you are experiencing. >> If not, can you give us description of all the steps in your process. >> >> On the note of merging to a temporary dataset before going to the Golden >> dataset, I personally follow this approach. >> The reason being is that I can compare the temporary merged dataset to >> the >> Golden one to see what the differences are. >> If there is far too many, it suggests that discovery data is not quite >> right and I just get rid of the discovery data and wait for the next run >> without touching/corrupting the Golden dataset. >> >> Regards >> Jiri Pospisil >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai >> Sent: 23 January 2009 04:05 >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs†>> >> Sorry i didnt answer your question fully. What is happening is that >> instead >> of updating the record in GOLD it is creating a new record. I never want >> to >> create a new record in Gold, i just want to update whats there, if it >> doesnt >> exist in Gold then i dont want to merge the record. If you said that it >> was >> a best practise to create a Staging dataset and merge to Gold how would >> this >> be possible as the staging dataset would always have a Recon ID? >> I really appreciate the help, >> Thanks, >> Sean >> >> >> >> >> >> P Romain ARSlist wrote: >>> >>> When you say it doesn't work what exactly is happening, or not >>> happening? >>> >>> If you are trying to merge a CI from C to golden where they have >>> different >>> recon ids then that will never work. >>> >>> >>> >>>> It should still work if you have written the job properly. If you need >>>> to >>>> you can do a modify all on the Base Element form and set the >>>> ReconcilliationIdentity to zero. >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message- >>>> From: Heanai >>>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >>>> Sent: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 2:38 pm >>>> Subject: Reconciliation IDs†>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> I am having a bit of an issue. I have two datasets A and B. I use the >>>> econciliation Engine to merge attributes of these two to C. This works >>>> ine. However when i try to Reconcile C to the Gold Dataset it doesn't >>>> work >>>> s C already has a Reconciliation ID. Is there any way around this? >>>> Thanks, >>>> ean >>>> - >>>> iew this message in context: >>>> http://n2.nabble.com/Reconciliation-IDs%E2%80%8F-tp2199691p2199691.html >>>> ent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at >>>> Nabble.com. >>>>
Re: Reconciliation IDs
Jiri and Peter, Thanks very much for all your help Jiri Pospisil wrote: > > ++ > Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email > ++ > > Exactly, if you do not do it this way, the reconciliation engine cannot > merge the records correctly as it has no way to tell that entries in > dataset A, B and C actually represent an entry in the gold dataset, which > is then meant to get updated with the discovery data. > > Regards > Jiri > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai > Sent: 23 January 2009 15:39 > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs > > Jiri, > > Are you saying to first run an Identification job with A and B against the > gold dataset, this will set the Recon Ids, then merge them into the C > dataset and then into Gold. Wow i never thought of doing it like that, i > will give it a try now. > Thanks, > Sean > > > > > Jiri Pospisil wrote: >> >> ++ >> Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email >> ++ >> >> Sean, >> >> Is it possible that you do not identify CIs in datasets A and B against >> the golden dataset before merging them into C? >> I guess this would result in the behaviour you are experiencing. >> If not, can you give us description of all the steps in your process. >> >> On the note of merging to a temporary dataset before going to the Golden >> dataset, I personally follow this approach. >> The reason being is that I can compare the temporary merged dataset to >> the >> Golden one to see what the differences are. >> If there is far too many, it suggests that discovery data is not quite >> right and I just get rid of the discovery data and wait for the next run >> without touching/corrupting the Golden dataset. >> >> Regards >> Jiri Pospisil >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai >> Sent: 23 January 2009 04:05 >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs†>> >> Sorry i didnt answer your question fully. What is happening is that >> instead >> of updating the record in GOLD it is creating a new record. I never want >> to >> create a new record in Gold, i just want to update whats there, if it >> doesnt >> exist in Gold then i dont want to merge the record. If you said that it >> was >> a best practise to create a Staging dataset and merge to Gold how would >> this >> be possible as the staging dataset would always have a Recon ID? >> I really appreciate the help, >> Thanks, >> Sean >> >> >> >> >> >> P Romain ARSlist wrote: >>> >>> When you say it doesn't work what exactly is happening, or not >>> happening? >>> >>> If you are trying to merge a CI from C to golden where they have >>> different >>> recon ids then that will never work. >>> >>> >>> >>>> It should still work if you have written the job properly. If you need >>>> to >>>> you can do a modify all on the Base Element form and set the >>>> ReconcilliationIdentity to zero. >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message- >>>> From: Heanai >>>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >>>> Sent: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 2:38 pm >>>> Subject: Reconciliation IDs†>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> I am having a bit of an issue. I have two datasets A and B. I use the >>>> econciliation Engine to merge attributes of these two to C. This works >>>> ine. However when i try to Reconcile C to the Gold Dataset it doesn't >>>> work >>>> s C already has a Reconciliation ID. Is there any way around this? >>>> Thanks, >>>> ean >>>> - >>>> iew this message in context: >>>> http://n2.nabble.com/Reconciliation-IDs%E2%80%8F-tp2199691p2199691.html >>>> ent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at >>>> Nabble.com. >>>> ___ >>>> NSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >>
Re: Reconciliation IDs
If you have auto-identify on the you will need to run the identification against production and against C. In this case, if the recon job for A runs and doesn't identify a certain CI then it will be auto-identified and merged to C. If B has the same CI it will also not be found in production. If you don't also look in C then you will get two copies of it in production. Cheers Peter > ++ > Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email > ++ > > Exactly, if you do not do it this way, the reconciliation engine cannot > merge the records correctly as it has no way to tell that entries in > dataset A, B and C actually represent an entry in the gold dataset, which > is then meant to get updated with the discovery data. > > Regards > Jiri > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai > Sent: 23 January 2009 15:39 > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs > > Jiri, > > Are you saying to first run an Identification job with A and B against > the > gold dataset, this will set the Recon Ids, then merge them into the C > dataset and then into Gold. Wow i never thought of doing it like that, i > will give it a try now. > Thanks, > Sean > > > > > Jiri Pospisil wrote: >> >> ++ >> Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email >> ++ >> >> Sean, >> >> Is it possible that you do not identify CIs in datasets A and B against >> the golden dataset before merging them into C? >> I guess this would result in the behaviour you are experiencing. >> If not, can you give us description of all the steps in your process. >> >> On the note of merging to a temporary dataset before going to the >> Golden >> dataset, I personally follow this approach. >> The reason being is that I can compare the temporary merged dataset to >> the >> Golden one to see what the differences are. >> If there is far too many, it suggests that discovery data is not quite >> right and I just get rid of the discovery data and wait for the next >> run >> without touching/corrupting the Golden dataset. >> >> Regards >> Jiri Pospisil >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai >> Sent: 23 January 2009 04:05 >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDsââ¬Â >> >> Sorry i didnt answer your question fully. What is happening is that >> instead >> of updating the record in GOLD it is creating a new record. I never >> want >> to >> create a new record in Gold, i just want to update whats there, if it >> doesnt >> exist in Gold then i dont want to merge the record. If you said that it >> was >> a best practise to create a Staging dataset and merge to Gold how would >> this >> be possible as the staging dataset would always have a Recon ID? >> I really appreciate the help, >> Thanks, >> Sean >> >> >> >> >> >> P Romain ARSlist wrote: >>> >>> When you say it doesn't work what exactly is happening, or not >>> happening? >>> >>> If you are trying to merge a CI from C to golden where they have >>> different >>> recon ids then that will never work. >>> >>> >>> >>>> It should still work if you have written the job properly. If you >>>> need >>>> to >>>> you can do a modify all on the Base Element form and set the >>>> ReconcilliationIdentity to zero. >>>> >>>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: Heanai >>>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >>>> Sent: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 2:38 pm >>>> Subject: Reconciliation IDsââ¬Â >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> I am having a bit of an issue. I have two datasets A and B. I use the >>>> econciliation Engine to merge attributes of these two to C. This >>>> works >>>> ine. However when i try to Reconcile C to the Gold Dataset it doesn't >>>> work >>>> s C already has a Reconciliation ID. Is there any way around this? >>>> Thanks, >>>> ean >>>> - >>>> iew this messa
Re: Reconciliation IDs
++ Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email ++ Exactly, if you do not do it this way, the reconciliation engine cannot merge the records correctly as it has no way to tell that entries in dataset A, B and C actually represent an entry in the gold dataset, which is then meant to get updated with the discovery data. Regards Jiri -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai Sent: 23 January 2009 15:39 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs Jiri, Are you saying to first run an Identification job with A and B against the gold dataset, this will set the Recon Ids, then merge them into the C dataset and then into Gold. Wow i never thought of doing it like that, i will give it a try now. Thanks, Sean Jiri Pospisil wrote: > > ++ > Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email > ++ > > Sean, > > Is it possible that you do not identify CIs in datasets A and B against > the golden dataset before merging them into C? > I guess this would result in the behaviour you are experiencing. > If not, can you give us description of all the steps in your process. > > On the note of merging to a temporary dataset before going to the Golden > dataset, I personally follow this approach. > The reason being is that I can compare the temporary merged dataset to the > Golden one to see what the differences are. > If there is far too many, it suggests that discovery data is not quite > right and I just get rid of the discovery data and wait for the next run > without touching/corrupting the Golden dataset. > > Regards > Jiri Pospisil > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai > Sent: 23 January 2009 04:05 > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs†> > Sorry i didnt answer your question fully. What is happening is that > instead > of updating the record in GOLD it is creating a new record. I never want > to > create a new record in Gold, i just want to update whats there, if it > doesnt > exist in Gold then i dont want to merge the record. If you said that it > was > a best practise to create a Staging dataset and merge to Gold how would > this > be possible as the staging dataset would always have a Recon ID? > I really appreciate the help, > Thanks, > Sean > > > > > > P Romain ARSlist wrote: >> >> When you say it doesn't work what exactly is happening, or not happening? >> >> If you are trying to merge a CI from C to golden where they have >> different >> recon ids then that will never work. >> >> >> >>> It should still work if you have written the job properly. If you need >>> to >>> you can do a modify all on the Base Element form and set the >>> ReconcilliationIdentity to zero. >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Heanai >>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >>> Sent: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 2:38 pm >>> Subject: Reconciliation IDs†>>> >>> >>> >>> Hello, >>> I am having a bit of an issue. I have two datasets A and B. I use the >>> econciliation Engine to merge attributes of these two to C. This works >>> ine. However when i try to Reconcile C to the Gold Dataset it doesn't >>> work >>> s C already has a Reconciliation ID. Is there any way around this? >>> Thanks, >>> ean >>> - >>> iew this message in context: >>> http://n2.nabble.com/Reconciliation-IDs%E2%80%8F-tp2199691p2199691.html >>> ent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at >>> Nabble.com. >>> ___ >>> NSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >>> latinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >>> Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >>> >> >> ___ >> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >> Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Ans
Re: Reconciliation IDs
Jiri, Are you saying to first run an Identification job with A and B against the gold dataset, this will set the Recon Ids, then merge them into the C dataset and then into Gold. Wow i never thought of doing it like that, i will give it a try now. Thanks, Sean Jiri Pospisil wrote: > > ++ > Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email > ++ > > Sean, > > Is it possible that you do not identify CIs in datasets A and B against > the golden dataset before merging them into C? > I guess this would result in the behaviour you are experiencing. > If not, can you give us description of all the steps in your process. > > On the note of merging to a temporary dataset before going to the Golden > dataset, I personally follow this approach. > The reason being is that I can compare the temporary merged dataset to the > Golden one to see what the differences are. > If there is far too many, it suggests that discovery data is not quite > right and I just get rid of the discovery data and wait for the next run > without touching/corrupting the Golden dataset. > > Regards > Jiri Pospisil > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai > Sent: 23 January 2009 04:05 > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs†> > Sorry i didnt answer your question fully. What is happening is that > instead > of updating the record in GOLD it is creating a new record. I never want > to > create a new record in Gold, i just want to update whats there, if it > doesnt > exist in Gold then i dont want to merge the record. If you said that it > was > a best practise to create a Staging dataset and merge to Gold how would > this > be possible as the staging dataset would always have a Recon ID? > I really appreciate the help, > Thanks, > Sean > > > > > > P Romain ARSlist wrote: >> >> When you say it doesn't work what exactly is happening, or not happening? >> >> If you are trying to merge a CI from C to golden where they have >> different >> recon ids then that will never work. >> >> >> >>> It should still work if you have written the job properly. If you need >>> to >>> you can do a modify all on the Base Element form and set the >>> ReconcilliationIdentity to zero. >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Heanai >>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >>> Sent: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 2:38 pm >>> Subject: Reconciliation IDs†>>> >>> >>> >>> Hello, >>> I am having a bit of an issue. I have two datasets A and B. I use the >>> econciliation Engine to merge attributes of these two to C. This works >>> ine. However when i try to Reconcile C to the Gold Dataset it doesn't >>> work >>> s C already has a Reconciliation ID. Is there any way around this? >>> Thanks, >>> ean >>> - >>> iew this message in context: >>> http://n2.nabble.com/Reconciliation-IDs%E2%80%8F-tp2199691p2199691.html >>> ent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at >>> Nabble.com. >>> ___ >>> NSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >>> latinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >>> Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >>> >> >> ___ >> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >> Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/Reconciliation-IDs%E2%80%8F-tp2199691p2201649.html > Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > ___ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > > * > > This email is intended for the named recipient(s) only. Its c
Re: Reconciliation IDs
++ Please Read The Disclaimer At The Bottom Of This Email ++ Sean, Is it possible that you do not identify CIs in datasets A and B against the golden dataset before merging them into C? I guess this would result in the behaviour you are experiencing. If not, can you give us description of all the steps in your process. On the note of merging to a temporary dataset before going to the Golden dataset, I personally follow this approach. The reason being is that I can compare the temporary merged dataset to the Golden one to see what the differences are. If there is far too many, it suggests that discovery data is not quite right and I just get rid of the discovery data and wait for the next run without touching/corrupting the Golden dataset. Regards Jiri Pospisil -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Heanai Sent: 23 January 2009 04:05 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Reconciliation IDs†Sorry i didnt answer your question fully. What is happening is that instead of updating the record in GOLD it is creating a new record. I never want to create a new record in Gold, i just want to update whats there, if it doesnt exist in Gold then i dont want to merge the record. If you said that it was a best practise to create a Staging dataset and merge to Gold how would this be possible as the staging dataset would always have a Recon ID? I really appreciate the help, Thanks, Sean P Romain ARSlist wrote: > > When you say it doesn't work what exactly is happening, or not happening? > > If you are trying to merge a CI from C to golden where they have different > recon ids then that will never work. > > > >> It should still work if you have written the job properly. If you need to >> you can do a modify all on the Base Element form and set the >> ReconcilliationIdentity to zero. >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Heanai >> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG >> Sent: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 2:38 pm >> Subject: Reconciliation IDs†>> >> >> >> Hello, >> I am having a bit of an issue. I have two datasets A and B. I use the >> econciliation Engine to merge attributes of these two to C. This works >> ine. However when i try to Reconcile C to the Gold Dataset it doesn't >> work >> s C already has a Reconciliation ID. Is there any way around this? >> Thanks, >> ean >> - >> iew this message in context: >> http://n2.nabble.com/Reconciliation-IDs%E2%80%8F-tp2199691p2199691.html >> ent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> ___ >> NSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >> latinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >> >> >> ___ >> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >> Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >> > > _______ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > > -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Reconciliation-IDs%E2%80%8F-tp2199691p2201649.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" * This email is intended for the named recipient(s) only. Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named recipient(s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the consent of LCH.Clearnet Limited. If you are not an intended recipient please delete this e-mail and notify postmas...@lchclearnet.com. The contents of this email are subject to contract in all cases, and LCH.Clearnet Limited makes no contractual commitment save where confirmed by hard copy. LCH.Clearnet Limited accepts no liability, including liability for negligence, in respect of any statement in this email. LCH.Clearnet Limited, Registered Office: Aldgate House, 33 Aldgate High Street, London EC3N 1EA.Recognised as a Clearing House under the Financial Services & Markets Act 2000. Reg in England No.25932 Telephone: +44 20 7426 7000 Internet: http://www.lchclearnet.com *
