I'm trying to create four distinct queries to a Trac repository from the Mylyn plugin to Eclipse 3.7.1. What I want to do is to divide all tasks into exactly one of the following categories:
My problem: non-resolved tickets assigned to me
Somebody elses problem: non-resolved tickets assigned to somebody else
Nobodys problem (yet): non-resolved, unassigned tickets
No problem: resolved tickets
I have no problem creating the first and the last queries, by simply selecting appropriate status and, in the first case, assignee. But the two in the middle are causing problems:
Somebody elses problem: What I'd like here, is all the tickets that are not in status "closed" and assigned to someone who is not me. I tried the following requirements:
All statuses except "closed"
Owner is not "[my user id]"
But then I get all unassigned tickets as well. I'd lke it to get all tickets that fulfills status != closed && owner != me && owner != '' but it skips the last requirement.
Nobodys problem (yet): Here I'd like all tickets without an assignee, but if I leave the field empty the query creator just ignores it. I'd like status != closed && owner == '', but I only get status != closed.
It seems the problem is including fields in the query with requirements that they are or are not empty, I'm guessing because the form creates the query based on the fields where the user has actually entered some data.
How do I work around this?
One thing we did is to create a user named 'nobody'. 'nobody' is the default owner of all new tickets. To query for unassigned tickets, we simply look for all tickets assigned to 'nobody'. This ended up being easier to script and easier to connect to external tools than using owner==''.
Related
I'm starting to get the hang of NetSuite but this one has stumped me. I am looking for a way to update the line items on an order from a workflow in NetSuite. From what I can tell it doesn't seem to expose those fields, is there any way around this?
I have a saved search returning all of the transaction line items that I want modified, there is a field on the Sales Order Line Item called "Create Fulfillment Order". It shows up under saved searches as "Create Fulfillment Order Column", but when I add an action to a workflow to set the field value, the only fields that show up are Sales Order fields. Is there any way to access the Sales Order Column fields, since that's really what's being returned by my saved search anyways.
I've looked at the Sub Types defined in the workflow to see if there's one for Sales Order Item or anything but there's not, just Sales Order. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks in advance!
There's nothing built-in that will let you access transaction line items from a workflow. You'll need to use SuiteScript to create a custom workflow action. Then you can call that action from your workflow.
I have a specific question regarding the utilization of three tables in a database. Table 1 is called Personnel, and lists the names of the staff.
Tables 2 and 3 are identical, just listing two different types of overtime (long and short), along with the hours of the OT, Date of the OT, and Assigned to/Picked fields that are empty.
Here is the idea, I just dont know how to implement it. I would like to create a form for people to enter their OT picks, then automatically move to the next person on the list. So Rich Riphon, as an example, would be up first, would click on the link I would send, and a form would open up, showing his name, populated by the first table, and showing two drop down menus, populated from the Long OT and Short OT tables. He would select one from each (or None, which would be a option) and Submit it.
The form action would be to place his name in the Assigned field for the OT he picked, and place a Yes in the Picked field.
When the next person in the list opens the form, it has moved down to number 2 on the Personnel list, Cheryl Peterson, and shows her the remaining OT selections (excluding those that have a Yes in the Picked column).
Any suggestions or comments or better ways to do this would be appreciated.
First, I don't think ms access would be able to (easily) kick off the process based on a hyperlink. You may be able to do something by passing a macro name to a cmd prompt but it would take some mastery to get it working properly. Could you instead create a login form to get the current user? If you do that you don't really need to display the personnel list, just keep track of who has not yet responded to the OT request. Essentially at that point all you would need on your form is a listing of the available OT and a button that creates the assignment. Also it may be easier (and a better design) to only have one table for the OT listings and add a column for the type of overtime (long/short).
What if Cheryl isn't the 2nd person to get the form? Your concept goes out the window.
Instead, I would keep a table of all user names, and their security level. managers can see everything, individual users can only see their record. This would be done by using a query behind the OT Picks form, and either filtering by the current user or not filtering at all. I have done many of these types of "user control" databases and they all have worked well.
As for the actual OT tracking, I agree with Steve's post in that it should be done in one table This would be the preferred method of a concept referred to as "normalizing data". You really want to store as little data as possible to keep the size of your database down. As an example, your Login table would have the following fields:
UserID
FirstName
LastName
SecurityLevel
Address1
Address2
City
State
Phone
Etc... (whatever relevant info pertains to that person)
Your OT table would look like this:
UserID
OTDate
OTHours
OTType
Etc... (whatever else is relevant to OT)
You would then join those 2 tables on the UserID fields in both tables any time you needed to write a query to report OT hours or whatever.
According to the documentation, there is a Business Rule for Vendor and Employee that says
The name, first name, or last name field should not be blank.
Considering that NAME is required for create, the question is ¿Does this mean that ALL three properties have to have a value on Create?
We understood that, so we ran some tests. Creating a record with the three properties populated has no problem. The issue comes when we try so insert a null value for GivenName and FamilyName (first name and last name).
Quickbooks seems to take the NULL values as valid, and when inserting the record is not returning any error. The problem is that the record that was inserted never shows in the QBD UI, but is seems like it persists somewhere, because if we try to insert it again we get a "duplicate name" error.
Not sure if this is an issue or an expected behaviour... Any hints??
Thanks
QuickBooks for windows has some legacy behavior to be aware of. The First, Last and Name combines for a unique identifier accross Customers, Vendors and Employees. So you should fill in ALL the information you have. Any attempts to insert a record with the same F or L name, will fail if there is a Customer, Vendor or Employee with the same F & L.
Second, you mentioned that the record doesn't show in QuickBooks for Windows?
Did it sync successfully? Did you check the error state of the record you inserted?
Did you look at the sync logs to see if it failed to sync?
Lastly, you need to check all three objects for a user with the same F & L name if you are getting a duplicate error. Normally you would check to see if the customer/vendor/employee exists firsts so you can update the existing or determine if it is in fact a new record.
hope that helps
Jarred
Suppose I have two objects
1.Account- standard object[it has a field name Status_c which is a picklist having value inprogress and closed]
2.Client_c - custom object[it also have same field name Status__c which is a picklist having value inprogress and closed]
and Client__c has lookup to Account name which means Account has a related list of client object .
My question is :
I want to write a trigger where if I put account status to "closed" I can not put client status to "closed",it should throw an error message on client object or if I put client status to closed I can not put account status to closed vice versa.
Can any one please help me to write a trigger on this??
Conceptually, I think what you are looking to do is set up Validation Rules on both of those objects. Your validation rule on Client_c should be pretty simple: TEXT(Status_c) == 'Closed' && TEXT(Account_c.Status_c) == 'Closed'
The more interesting piece is how you handle making sure none of your related items are Closed when you move the Account to Closed. I tend to prefer creating a field on the Account that keeps track of the status of the related items (checkbox) that basically tells me whether it is valid for me to change my status or not. In this case, the validation rule becomes pretty simple. In order to set that boolean value, I end up using a Trigger on Client__c that basically just grabs all the Accounts when a Client is being modified in the batch (taking into account both inserts, upserts, and deletes):
SELECT Account__c.Id FROM Client__c WHERE Id =: Trigger.new OR Id =: Trigger.old
Then create a Set of all the Account Ids (in this example, named accounts), and run a query to retrieve ALL Clients related to those Ids (in a single query to ensure you don't hit SOQL limits).
SELECT Account__c.Id, Status__c FROM Client__c WHERE Account__c.Id =: accounts
From the results of this, you will iterate over all of the entries, tossing them into a Map keyed by the Account Id where the value is a List of Clients. When you are done, run a query to get all accounts based on the "accounts" list from earlier (which was just a list of strings, not actual Accounts), subsequently iterate over all the Clients associated with that Account, and if a Client is marked as Closed, you will update the metadata of that Account accordingly. If no Clients are closed, the Account will be marked as such. Once you are finished, run an update statement to update the list of Accounts that you have modified.
I have quite the request. A developer created our database that has multiple Layouts with a relationship tree that is very messy. Had another developer come in, take a look at it, he said that it would be too time consuming and painful to deconstruct our system, consider creating a script for now so that you can work around it until it can be fixed. Here's the dilemma: I've got information on one page that is supposed to reference information on a number of different pages utilizing tabs and portals. However, all the information is linked to a username. This username is not static/serialized or what have you. Therefore, if the issue is not caught right away a great deal of information can be linked to this person's 'page'. If the name is incorrect and someone tries to alter the username even slightly, it breaks that relationship and starts a new one. The information does not disappear, but it is basically sitting in limbo somewhere until you change the name back to the original. I've actually tried exporting the information, changing the information that doesn't match, i.e. changing a name from Jon.Smith to John.Smith, and then importing the information to a new 'page' for that person with unsuccessful results. Which brings me to my question, is a script going to be able to fix this problem? Likewise, are there any suggestions to how to create this script? I apologize, but I have very little experience with DataBase management at all, and am not sure why this project fell upon me. Any help would be GREATLY appreciated.
Well, as a general answer, just about anything that a user can do in FileMaker (and by user, I mean non-developer, so activities such as defining the database structure, writing scripts, etc., are excluded) can be scripted. So if you're able to "solve" the problem by resetting a field's value, for example, then, yes, a script can do that.
Regarding your specific trouble, a script probably doesn't need to export the records, but could reset the values for the field within FileMaker. This could be done either by looping through the records that need to be changed or by using the Replace Field Contents script step. So a script could do something like this:
Go to Layout[MyLayout] // Go to a layout that is attached to the table you need to search.
Perform Find[Restore] // Restore a find that will show the records you need to change.
Replace Field Contents[Table::Field; "New Value"]
Offering more advice than this would require actually seeing the database and understanding more about your specific needs.
wchsTech4, you are in luck because your problem is easy to fix. You don't even need a script.
BACK UP YOUR FILE(S) FIRST. Then:
1) Create two new fields:
id (person table)
Options for id: Auto-enter serial number
person_id (the table related to person)
2) Generate serial numbers for the new id field in the person table.
Navigate to the person layout.
'Records' > 'Show all records'
Click in the id field and select 'Records' > 'Replace field contents.'
Choose 'Replace with serial numbers' and accept the defaults. Be sure to check the box to update your next serial number.
3) Place the serial numbers you just generated in the related table.
Navigate to the related layout.
'Records' > 'Show all records'
Click in the person_id field and select 'Records' > 'Replace field contents.'
Choose 'Specify' next to 'Replace with calculated results.'
In the drop down on the top left, select the related person table.
Double click the id field (your calculation should be person::id, with person replaced with the name of your table).
Click 'OK' and then 'Replace.'
4) Change the relationship.
Select 'File' > 'Manage' > 'Database.'
Navigate to the relationship tab.
Change the relationship from being based on name to id.
5) Test everything. Should work.
There is a chance that your related records are being created in such a manner that you also need to modify a script, website, or something else not mentioned here to have your fix work going forward. That is important to investigate.