Hi Karl, Many thanks for your prompt actions. Just checking with our Documentum guys. I'll let you know as soon as I have some updates.
Thanks, Radek On 31 March 2016 at 07:44, Karl Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Radek, > > A fix for the UI, at least, can be downloaded from the ticket > CONNECTORS-1293. I can find no definitive mechanism for why this would > lead to no attributes being collected, but it's worth applying the patch, > updating your jobs, and giving it a try nonetheless. Please let me know > what happens. > > Thanks, > Karl > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Karl Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Radek, >> >> The code that reads attribute values from Documentum DFC persistent >> objects does use the attribute name, as follows: >> >> >>>>>> >> /** Get all the values that an attribute has, including multiple ones >> if present */ >> public String[] getAttributeValues(String attribute) >> throws DocumentumException, RemoteException >> { >> try >> { >> int valueCount = object.getValueCount(attribute); >> String[] values = new String[valueCount]; >> int y = 0; >> while (y < valueCount) >> { >> // Fetch the attribute. >> // It's supposed to work for all attribute types... >> String value = object.getRepeatingString(attribute,y); >> values[y++] = value; >> } >> return values; >> } >> catch (DfAuthenticationException ex) >> { >> throw new DocumentumException("Bad credentials: >> "+ex.getMessage(),DocumentumException.TYPE_BADCREDENTIALS); >> } >> catch (DfIdentityException ex) >> { >> throw new DocumentumException("Bad docbase name: >> "+ex.getMessage(),DocumentumException.TYPE_BADCONNECTIONPARAMS); >> } >> catch (DfDocbaseUnreachableException e) >> { >> throw new DocumentumException("Docbase unreachable: >> "+e.getMessage(),DocumentumException.TYPE_SERVICEINTERRUPTION); >> } >> catch (DfIOException e) >> { >> throw new DocumentumException("Docbase io exception: >> "+e.getMessage(),DocumentumException.TYPE_SERVICEINTERRUPTION); >> } >> catch (DfException e) >> { >> throw new DocumentumException("Documentum error: "+e.getMessage()); >> } >> } >> <<<<<< >> >> This is how the DFC IDfPersistentObject API is structured. So it doesn't >> look like multiple language values are supported in DFC. So I don't know >> why you wouldn't get attribute values unless the UI issue is causing there >> to be no specified attributes for whatever type matches the document. I'll >> have to dig into that code next. >> >> Karl >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Karl Wright <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Radek, >>> >>> I will have to check how the connector uses attribute names and get back >>> to you. But I am pretty certain that the connector specifies attributes in >>> its dql queries by means of the attribute name, not the r_object_id. If >>> that's the problem, it also implies that there can be a different attribute >>> value for each language, which might be why you aren't seeing the >>> attributes you are expecting. >>> >>> This is not an easy problem to address, however. >>> >>> Can you confirm whether or not documents can have different attribute >>> values for each language in Documentum? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Karl >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Radek Sklenicka < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Karl, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We discovered that we get metadata names in triplicate because there >>>> are 3 languages installed in Documentum. >>>> >>>> Multiple attribute records have each the same attr_name and type_name >>>> but unique r_object_id and different nls_key (en, es, pt). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Could this be the reason why metadata doesn’t make it through the >>>> pipeline and we can’t get any metadata during crawling? >>>> >>>> Are unique attr_names required in Documentum connector? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> >>>> >>>> Radek >>>> >>>> On 23 March 2016 at 18:28, Radek Sklenicka <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks for verification, Karl. >>>>> >>>>> -Radek >>>>> >>>>> On 23 March 2016 at 14:01, Karl Wright <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Radek, >>>>>> >>>>>> This log output comes from RMI, apparently, and is not something I've >>>>>> ever seen before. But it does look like it's a complete list of what's >>>>>> being returned for a request for the list of attributes (the first >>>>>> entry), >>>>>> and for a specific object (the second entry). >>>>>> >>>>>> Karl >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Radek Sklenicka < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Karl, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "select attr_name FROM dmi_dd_attr_info" really returns duplicates - >>>>>>> we're looking into that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is there also a DQL query (or function) used by ManifoldCF that we >>>>>>> can try to check what/if attributes are being returned for a particular >>>>>>> record? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We have trace logs from DFC and it looks like the attributes are >>>>>>> being returned from the content server. >>>>>>> Could you please help us decode the logs - where to look/verify if >>>>>>> attributes are handed over to ManifoldCF? >>>>>>> Can we deduce from the logs attached below that the attributes are >>>>>>> transferred from DFC to ManifoldCF? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Many thanks, >>>>>>> Radek >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2016-03-22 13:29:26.008 <USER_DTESTER|s9(21.0)|SM@14660772> [RMI >>>>>>> TCP Connection(1823)-127.0.0.1] [EXIT] >>>>>>> [email protected] ==> >>>>>>> AspectedLiteType@110eb5e{name=do_domep_project_hse, typeVersion=0, >>>>>>> cacheVStamp=178498, attributes={asp_herencia.atr_isnew, >>>>>>> asp_herencia.atr_niveles, asp_herencia.atr_tipo, >>>>>>> asp_herencia.i_partition}, >>>>>>> superType=LiteType@2045f2{name=do_domep_project_hse, >>>>>>> typeVersion=32, cacheVStamp=178498, attributes={atr_audit_type, >>>>>>> atr_speciality, atr_emergency_related}, >>>>>>> superType=LiteType@a67471{name=do_domep_project, >>>>>>> typeVersion=32, cacheVStamp=178486, attributes={atr_uwi, atr_well_name, >>>>>>> atr_usi, atr_survey_name}, superType=LiteType@f74077{name=do_domep_base, >>>>>>> typeVersion=27, cacheVStamp=178438, attributes={atr_confidential_level, >>>>>>> atr_owner_area, atr_logical_code, atr_original_reference_id, >>>>>>> atr_revision, >>>>>>> atr_entity, atr_author, atr_doc_type, atr_category_doc, atr_subcat_doc, >>>>>>> atr_discipline, atr_subdiscipline, atr_language, atr_physical_document, >>>>>>> atr_physical_code, atr_warehouse, atr_retention, atr_digital_media, >>>>>>> atr_internal, atr_country, atr_basin, atr_environment, atr_acreage, >>>>>>> atr_abstract, atr_doc_creation_date, atr_title, atr_collection, >>>>>>> atr_is_collection, atr_is_principal, atr_is_anexo, atr_id_collection, >>>>>>> atr_is_relation, atr_field, atr_original_revision, atr_remarks, >>>>>>> atr_keywords, atr_principal_folder_id, atr_original_version, >>>>>>> atr_be_name, >>>>>>> atr_be_ref, atr_be_short_name, atr_issued_for_code, >>>>>>> atr_issued_for_description, atr_subbasin, atr_be_type_id, atr_comment, >>>>>>> atr_status, atr_prepared_by, atr_preparation_date, atr_verified_by, >>>>>>> atr_verification_date, atr_approved_by, atr_approval_date, >>>>>>> atr_workflow}, >>>>>>> superType=LiteType@19390bd{name=do_general, typeVersion=6, >>>>>>> cacheVStamp=167968, attributes={negocio, attr_is_gdcom}, >>>>>>> superType=LiteType@16658e8{name=dm_document, typeVersion=2, >>>>>>> cacheVStamp=52034, attributes={}, >>>>>>> superType=LiteType@6aac49{name=dm_sysobject, >>>>>>> typeVersion=3, cacheVStamp=0, attributes={object_name, r_object_type, >>>>>>> title, subject, authors, keywords, a_application_type, a_status, >>>>>>> r_creation_date, r_modify_date, r_modifier, r_access_date, a_is_hidden, >>>>>>> i_is_deleted, a_retention_date, a_archive, a_compound_architecture, >>>>>>> a_link_resolved, i_reference_cnt, i_has_folder, i_folder_id, >>>>>>> r_composite_id, r_composite_label, r_component_label, r_order_no, >>>>>>> r_link_cnt, r_link_high_cnt, r_assembled_from_id, r_frzn_assembly_cnt, >>>>>>> r_has_frzn_assembly, resolution_label, r_is_virtual_doc, i_contents_id, >>>>>>> a_content_type, r_page_cnt, r_content_size, a_full_text, a_storage_type, >>>>>>> i_cabinet_id, owner_name, owner_permit, group_name, group_permit, >>>>>>> world_permit, i_antecedent_id, i_chronicle_id, i_latest_flag, >>>>>>> r_lock_owner, >>>>>>> r_lock_date, r_lock_machine, log_entry, r_version_label, i_branch_cnt, >>>>>>> i_direct_dsc, r_immutable_flag, r_frozen_flag, r_has_events, acl_domain, >>>>>>> acl_name, a_special_app, i_is_reference, r_creator_name, r_is_public, >>>>>>> r_policy_id, r_resume_state, r_current_state, r_alias_set_id, >>>>>>> a_effective_date, a_expiration_date, a_publish_formats, >>>>>>> a_effective_label, >>>>>>> a_effective_flag, a_category, language_code, a_is_template, >>>>>>> a_controlling_app, r_full_content_size, a_extended_properties, >>>>>>> a_is_signed, >>>>>>> a_last_review_date, i_retain_until, r_aspect_name, i_retainer_id, >>>>>>> i_partition, i_is_replica, i_vstamp}}}}}}}} >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2016-03-22 13:29:26.010 <USER_DTESTER|s5(17.0)|SM@16366401> [RMI >>>>>>> TCP Connection(1820)-127.0.0.1] [RPC_EXIT] ......RPC: applyForObject >>>>>>> ==> >>>>>>> TypedData@144302b[id=098c1b38809921b1, >>>>>>> type=do_domep_project_well_wd, readOnly=false, autoFill=true, >>>>>>> fetchTimestamp=0, values=[object_name=DSC00683.JPG, >>>>>>> r_object_type=do_domep_project_well_wd, title=, subject=, authors=[], >>>>>>> keywords=[], a_application_type=, a_status=, r_creation_date=2/11/2016 >>>>>>> 8:35:45 AM, r_modify_date=3/7/2016 11:17:37 AM, r_modifier=admdcmt, >>>>>>> r_access_date=3/16/2016 12:23:59 PM, a_is_hidden=F, i_is_deleted=F, >>>>>>> a_retention_date=nulldate, a_archive=F, a_compound_architecture=, >>>>>>> a_link_resolved=F, i_reference_cnt=1, i_has_folder=T, >>>>>>> i_folder_id=[0b8c1b3880991ad3], r_composite_id=[], r_composite_label=[], >>>>>>> r_component_label=[], r_order_no=[], r_link_cnt=0, r_link_high_cnt=0, >>>>>>> r_assembled_from_id=0000000000000000, r_frzn_assembly_cnt=0, >>>>>>> r_has_frzn_assembly=F, resolution_label=, r_is_virtual_doc=0, >>>>>>> i_contents_id=068c1b388064051a, a_content_type=jpeg, r_page_cnt=1, >>>>>>> r_content_size=949228, a_full_text=T, a_storage_type=repo, >>>>>>> i_cabinet_id=0c8c1b38806aee30, owner_name=Domep controlador 00010, >>>>>>> owner_permit=7, group_name=, group_permit=1, world_permit=1, >>>>>>> i_antecedent_id=0000000000000000, i_chronicle_id=098c1b38809921b1, >>>>>>> i_latest_flag=T, r_lock_owner=, r_lock_date=nulldate, r_lock_machine=, >>>>>>> log_entry=, r_version_label=[1.0, CURRENT], i_branch_cnt=0, >>>>>>> i_direct_dsc=F, >>>>>>> r_immutable_flag=F, r_frozen_flag=F, r_has_events=F, >>>>>>> acl_domain=admdocum, >>>>>>> acl_name=domep_ac_en_02080, a_special_app=, i_is_reference=F, >>>>>>> r_creator_name=Domep controlador 00010, r_is_public=F, >>>>>>> r_policy_id=468c1b38809c6e47, r_resume_state=-1, r_current_state=0, >>>>>>> r_alias_set_id=0000000000000000, a_effective_date=[], >>>>>>> a_expiration_date=[], >>>>>>> a_publish_formats=[], a_effective_label=[], a_effective_flag=[], >>>>>>> a_category=, language_code=, a_is_template=F, a_controlling_app=, >>>>>>> r_full_content_size=949228, a_extended_properties=[], a_is_signed=F, >>>>>>> a_last_review_date=nulldate, i_retain_until=nulldate, >>>>>>> r_aspect_name=[asp_herencia], i_retainer_id=[], i_partition=0, >>>>>>> i_is_replica=F, i_vstamp=4, negocio=E&P, attr_is_gdcom=F, >>>>>>> atr_confidential_level=Internal Use, atr_owner_area=OFICINA DE E, >>>>>>> atr_logical_code=IQEXPEOMKUR000WEL2016000063, >>>>>>> atr_original_reference_id=[], >>>>>>> atr_revision=, atr_entity=[], atr_author=[Domep controlador 00010], >>>>>>> atr_doc_type=Reporting, atr_category_doc=Geology, >>>>>>> atr_subcat_doc=Progress >>>>>>> Report, atr_discipline=GEOLOGY, atr_subdiscipline=[], >>>>>>> atr_language=[ENGLISH], atr_physical_document=F, atr_physical_code=[], >>>>>>> atr_warehouse=, atr_retention=YES, atr_digital_media=F, >>>>>>> atr_internal=YES, >>>>>>> atr_country=[XYZ], atr_basin=[XYZZ], atr_environment=, atr_acreage=[], >>>>>>> atr_abstract=, atr_doc_creation_date=5/22/2006 8:31:43 AM, >>>>>>> atr_title=WELL >>>>>>> BARAM 1 PHOTOS FIELD 06, atr_collection=[], atr_is_collection=F, >>>>>>> atr_is_principal=F, atr_is_anexo=F, atr_id_collection=[], >>>>>>> atr_is_relation=F, atr_field=[], atr_original_revision=, atr_remarks=, >>>>>>> atr_keywords=[], atr_principal_folder_id=0b8c1b3880991ad3, >>>>>>> atr_original_version=, atr_be_name=BARAM 1, atr_be_ref=IQWEL000008, >>>>>>> atr_be_short_name=BA 1, atr_issued_for_code=, >>>>>>> atr_issued_for_description=, >>>>>>> atr_subbasin=[], atr_be_type_id=8, atr_comment=, atr_status=Draft, >>>>>>> atr_prepared_by=[], atr_preparation_date=nulldate, atr_verified_by=[], >>>>>>> atr_verification_date=nulldate, atr_approved_by=[], >>>>>>> atr_approval_date=nulldate, atr_workflow=, atr_well_name=BARAM 1, >>>>>>> atr_uwi=IQ010004432, atr_borehole_name=[BARAM 1], >>>>>>> atr_ubhi=[IQ01000443200], >>>>>>> atr_borehole_alias=[], atr_borehole_short_name=[], atr_sample_type=[], >>>>>>> atr_analysis_type=[], asp_herencia.atr_isnew=F, >>>>>>> asp_herencia.atr_niveles=0, >>>>>>> asp_herencia.atr_tipo=[], asp_herencia.i_partition=0, >>>>>>> r_object_id=098c1b38809921b1, _KEEP_LOCK_=F, _FREEZE_COMPONENTS_=F, >>>>>>> _THAW_COMPONENTS_=F, _CONTENTS_CHANGED_=F, _DIST_SAVE_AS_NEW_=F]] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 11 March 2016 at 15:33, Radek Sklenicka < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks Karl, we'll verify that. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -Radek >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 11 March 2016 at 14:21, Karl Wright <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Radek, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is the DQL query that is run: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> String strDQL = "select attr_name FROM dmi_dd_attr_info >>>>>>>>> where type_name = '" + docType + "' order by attr_name asc"; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Karl Wright <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Radek, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The Document Types page runs a DQL query to populate the document >>>>>>>>>> types. The fact that you get duplicates means that something may be >>>>>>>>>> corrupt with your Document instance. It's possible that for some >>>>>>>>>> reason >>>>>>>>>> the instance is set up with multiple records that each have the same >>>>>>>>>> name >>>>>>>>>> but different key values. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Documentum used to have a little web app that allowed you to >>>>>>>>>> execute DQL queries. I'd experiment to see what was leading to the >>>>>>>>>> duplication. The fact that you can't get any metadata during >>>>>>>>>> crawling is >>>>>>>>>> almost certainly related. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:10 AM, Radek Sklenicka < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> We are not able to pull metadata from one of our Documentum >>>>>>>>>>> instances (it is 6.7) >>>>>>>>>>> Interestingly, on the Job > Document Types page each metadata >>>>>>>>>>> field is displayed 3 times in the metadata boxes - could this be an >>>>>>>>>>> issue? >>>>>>>>>>> Screenshots: >>>>>>>>>>> http://take.ms/mJhPh >>>>>>>>>>> http://take.ms/AMZF0 >>>>>>>>>>> We have quite a long list of document types and it takes minutes >>>>>>>>>>> to load the Document Types page. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Also, we can successfully pull metadata from our testing >>>>>>>>>>> Documentum (it is 7.1), and I noticed that there is a difference in >>>>>>>>>>> connector logs between the two: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 1.) here we are able to pull metadata: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> DEBUG 2016-03-10 03:50:08,051 (Worker thread '3') - DCTM: >>>>>>>>>>> Document 090007c28000569d has version label: >>>>>>>>>>> 11+authors+object_name+owner_name+owner_permit+r_creation_date+r_creator_name+r_modifier+r_modify_date+r_object_id+r_object_type+title++0+DEAD_AUTHORITY+1.0_0_ >>>>>>>>>>> http://localhost/webtop/ >>>>>>>>>>> DEBUG 2016-03-10 03:50:08,052 (Worker thread '3') - DCTM: Inside >>>>>>>>>>> processDocuments >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.) NOT able to pull metadata: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> DEBUG 2016-03-10 14:58:22,908 (Worker thread '22') - DCTM: >>>>>>>>>>> Document 098c1b3880991f48 has version label: 0++0+DEAD_AUTHORITY+_4_ >>>>>>>>>>> http://localhost/webtop >>>>>>>>>>> DEBUG 2016-03-10 14:58:22,908 (Worker thread '22') - DCTM: >>>>>>>>>>> Inside processDocuments >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Any ideas will be appreciated. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Radek >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
