Hi @Shneor Cheshin I’m pretty sure ‘Back in the day’ is reserved from the period about 20 to 25 years ago 😂.I’ve kind of managed to do this using a SQL Insert statement. Which gives me the current shift plan from ARP into FSM. So at least the shifts are now showing on the schedule board. In my DEV environment i’m going to see if I can generate the shifts when ARP produces them on a daily basis through a Scheduled SQL job and see if that does the trick. Thanks for the reply though. Ady
@buddhima On the screen grab, I think you need to switch the Related Table and Primary Col Name. Not sure if that will fix it, but those two appear to be the incorrect way round.Ady
@SAMLK - Hi, thanks again for the previous assistance. Just wondering if you were able to review the last request and the ability to duplicate the elements even though they are the same name? Ady
@SAMLK Thank you, I have attached the XML.Ady
@SAMLK Hopefully looking at the document I have to map against this should be the last question.All the elements start with the same value. <Extrinsic name="ProactisDepartmentId">S005_D031</Extrinsic> <Extrinsic name="ProactisCostCenterId">S005_D031</Extrinsic> <Extrinsic name="ProactisCostCenterErpId">D031</Extrinsic>Therefore when the integration is triggered, and I produce an XML output file, only the last value is showing. Is there a way to produce all 3 elements on the same XML as theoretically they are all the same name. Just the attribute is set in them to differentiate. Thanks again Ady
@SAMLK That works a treat. Thank you.
@SAMLK Whilst we’re on a roll.The next part of the message to post is to pass an attribute and a variable. <Extrinsic name="ProactisDepartmentId">S005_D031</Extrinsic> <Extrinsic name="ProactisCostCenterId">S005_D031</Extrinsic> <Extrinsic name="ProactisCostCenterErpId">D031</Extrinsic> I have set-up like; But the format XML being created show like<Extrinsic name="N11" />It is simply using the variable from the Purchase Order.So what I want to get to is;<Extrinsic name="ProactisDepartmentId">N11</Extrinsic>Is there a way to achieve this?Ady
@SAMLK - That’s worked a treat also.Thank you for the replies, it’s very much appreciated.Ady
Hi @SAMLK - absolute magic!!That’s worked a treat, thank you very much.One more question if I may. One of the attributes is ‘xml:lang’ - FSM when generating the XML doesn’t like the ‘ : ‘ colon character. Is there anything I can do the allow that to be supported when generating the XML? Ady
Hi,Hopefully me asking for any assistance on this bumps it up any algorithm being used and someone see’s this.Just want to know if the above is possible.Ideally get answer through this platform.Ady
@MartinF I always find if the joins in the metadata cannot be done, then another solution would be to use a xPath in a business rule.Example below;<perform_batch><hierarchy_select result_name="select_task_text01"> <primary_table>task_text</primary_table> <attrs> <attr>task_text.task_id</attr> <attr>request.cust_prob_descr</attr> </attrs> <from> <table>task</table> <table>request</table> </from> <where> <join_constraint> <constraint> <left_operand>task_text.task_id</left_operand> <operator>eq</operator> <right_operand>task.task_id</right_operand> </constraint> <constraint> <left_operand>task.request_id</left_operand> <operator>eq</operator> <right_operand>request.request_id</right_operand> </constraint>
Hi @StejonatL Not sure if this is correct or not, but would the TEAM.PERSON_ID_LEADER map benefit from adding in a constraint? Ady
Hi @SAMLK ,Unfortunately I don’t have access to the policy. I’d like believe there would be nothing in there for Contracts as we don’t use them. So any custom policies would be unaffected.Ady
Hi,Anyone able to assist on this one please?Ady
@sarugb Hi, thanks for the reply.Not sure why, but remember raising this topic and having issues posting it. There should be some screenshots to accompany the description above. However, i’m currently speaking to a PSO Consultant reference this as part of the project we have in place. But thanks again for the comment. Ady
Looking at getting Appointment Bookings during some other testing and noticed that a slot was offered when I wasn’t expecting it. I have then gone to test in isolation and noticed the following. Resource 127 will be the only person able to do this job. There is a private activity ending at 15:30 on 5th June.I have 2 tasks being sent to ABE with an activity group as follows <Activity_Group> <activity_id1>5961328</activity_id1> <activity_id2>5961327</activity_id2> <pre_co_req>PRE</pre_co_req> <min_delay>PT0S</min_delay> <same_resource>true</same_resource> <split_allowed>false</split_allowed> <all_or_nothing>true</all_or_nothing> </Activity_Group> The time left at the end of the shift is 90 mins.Activity Id 2 is 80 mins and 1 is 45 mins. ABE gave the following on the Appointment Output. <prospective_resource_id>127</prospective_resource_id> <prospec
@Lee Pinchbeck Thanks for the response. I’m currently investigating different ways with Business Rules, but that in itself is causing some other issues (for example updating tasks will just re-send data to PSO).I also understand the issue around the concurrency errors as we see this on a daily basis, and with the task table being a key data table it’s going to be receiving updates from various sources.You reference “if the fields are linked back up” - does that mean in your experience you have seen customer revert back to the Broadcast directly updating the task?I’d love to get our user base to switch away from FSM SB to the PSO Workbench, but operationally it would be really difficult to achieve.Ady
Hi, Anyone in the community had to deal with this major change in the PSO to FSM Broadcast integration? If so did you change the way you work, or did you get a customisation to revert the process back to how it was perfectly fine before? Cheers
Paul, That fantastic, thank you.The XML is now posting the values in the format I need. RegardsAdy
@Paul Drennan Don’t suppose you had anymore more thoughts on the above?I have been trying to set the value using the guid variable in the XML Template as this worked for the API Session function. Unfortunately the sequence is being bypassed when checking the integration log.<content><function><getAPISession /></function></content>. Ady
Hi Paul, I believe the GUID is going to be generated by FSM using the {guid} variable and we’ll pass that as part of the map. Ady
Hi Paul, This is a link to the call I am attempting.https://developer.intacct.com/web-services/your-first-api-calls/#get-an-api-session In the image below it’s line 20 I am struggling to replicate.In FSM the XML Map looks like;With the ‘80’ sequence having the XML Template set to this for the function.I hope this helps. Ady
@vineeth Yes that’s the field.But if you can access the SQL Server. Load a command prompt and do an ipconfig/allWhen I used the Host Name followed by the Primary Dns Suffix to get my FQDN the upgrade flowed all the way through.So instead of the dbo.fsm as that’s the database, you will need the server and then DNS name.Hope that helps Ady
@vineeth I was referring to the ‘Database Server’ field.I was using the the full server name along with the FQDN.Ady
Hi @vineeth,When adding in the details for the server name and a sys admin user, try adding in the fully qualified domain name to the name of the server in the setup.exe. I’m also running upgrade packages and was getting a similar message. The FQDN resolved the issue though.Ady
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
