Hi @mmol ,we are on 21R2SU12 and it works for me, pls. see screenshots below, you just need to push button “Re-generate Excel Migration” after you update your migration job with the fetch rule condition.BR Jan
Hi Linda,we also recognized that the functionality to upload invoice images has been re-designed with 22R2 and there are no FTP parameters on company level anymore. Unfortunately this change is not mentioned in “What’s new” presentations so it was a little surprise for us as we are using this functionality heavily in 21R2SU13 with TIF images. So we did the new setup and tested the scenario we are using today and it seems to be working fine with PDF images, but it does not work with TIF images we are using today, in despite we have enabled TIF to PDF conversion on company level.The parameter for the TIF conversion is still available on company level, when the conversion is supposed to happen with the new setup? May be you should consider to enhance technical documentation with information regarding the image format conversion.I have also recorded case for this, where you can find screenshots with the error given for TIF images.Ticket Form for Case - Service Center (ifs.com) Thank YouBR
Dear Udesha,thanks for the reply. I have been trying to make the same call to 3PS from Postman and it works fine. I have tried to send the request from Postman and IFS to webhook.site to compare, however when I switch to ‘PATCH_NO-X’ the request is not sent at all, pls. see screenshots below. Btw. you are referring to ‘HTTP_NO-X’, so should the method be ‘PATCH_NO-X’ or ‘HTTP_NO-X’? Request from PostmanRequest from IFS with ‘PATCH’ methodRequest from IFS with ‘PATCH_NO-X’Request is not appearing in webhook at all, application message is in waiting status with the following error message.
Just thinking why the http method ‘PATCH_NO-X’ is not listed at the routing address.
Hi @JOOLSE ,we are using IFS Cloud 23R2 in remote deployment. We are testing NotifyMe 2, the app itself works fine, but I would like to make the notifications working too. I have created Notification Hub in Azure, but not sure what the Notification Hub URL and Notification Hub Path should be populated with from Azure to make this working. Also IFS doc is silent in this. Will the notification hub be actually working with the remote deployment?Thanks for a hint.Jan
Hi @Mathias Dahl / @chanaka-shanil,We are actually facing the same issue, file storage pod is remaining in the init status, Any idea what might be the issue?I’m also little bit confused with highlighted statement in technical doc below, can you pls. explain?
Hi @Mathias Dahl then it’s ok, however I expect Azure file share will work too.
Hi @Mathias Dahl yes, we have made Azure share working and we also did first testing, with few questions around:1. it seems all the documents are stored into 1 subdirectory called “docman” on the Azure share, and we were not able to force it to store them into another subdirectory (subdirectory IFSOCTEST on the screenshot below was created manually), despite the repository setting below. So it’s not possible to store particular doc classes into their subdirectories as we do today with FTP?2. I cannot see any connection between document in IFS and file on share, since I did not find any properties/etag or metada stored with the file on the share.
Hi @Mathias Dahl,Ref. 1 - we have FTP repository for Oriflame R&D which keeps all the documents related to Oriflame products, raw materials, ingrediencies, packaging etc. there. The repository is not being accessed via application only, but directly via FTP too and the docs are structured in subfolders, so the same type of the product related documentation (doc class) is stored in 1 folder. For instance subfolder RMSPEC, so the one knows there are Raw Material Specification documents, pls. see screenshot below. The files are named in the way the one can see what raw material document is for. The direct access is being used mainly to get a bulk of documents, but I will check with our R&D further what particular business scenarios they use the direct access for. Ref. 2 - I have read the post, well, it seems to be a mindset changer. Today users and consultants are used to see a connection between the doc record and the file. I can understand the file names are base64 encoded an
Hi @Mathias Dahl,we have discussed the new way of the file saving further internally and good news is that we could survive with 1 subfolder and with the new file naming. However we have identified further business scenarios where we access files directly or via a http link and unfortunately we will have to invest some effort to migrate these cases to restAPI.Since only 1 subfolder is allowed, there is also a question how to separate documents from PROD and TEST/UAT instances.Regarding the reference between IFS doc record and the file, it seems it’s not only me who is convinced it’s not a big deal to see the reference on IFS screen and/or Azure file (on IFS screen or on Azure file) and it would bring more confident and transparency, some screenshots below to inspire;-) Have a nice weekend!Jan
Hi @Mathias Dahl The safest way is to use two separate shares for different environments. You don't want to risk overwriting PROD, at least, with files people are playing with in TEST/DEV…Yes, indeed. However, without a possibility to open existing documents from PROD in TEST/UAT since only 1 file share is allowed for an instance or? I think you missed the word "not" in there somewhere, but I think I get the message anyway... 🙂Could be;-)This transparency you talk about, cannot be something a regular user need to care about, right? It's "an admin thing". And an admin can, once, to feel safe, use a tool or site to decode the Base64 encoding, to be convinced the file is actually where it should be. Once people understand how this works, do you think it's a big problem that you cannot look at the file names on the screen, in IFS and the Azure/SMB thing, and visually match them?Let me illustrate this on a case I faced on Friday. I was searching for a document in IFS and I wanted to get
@Mathias Dahl , I understand how it can be convenient to be logged in to TEST and be able to see documents from PROD, but it feels dangerous trying to do that by "reusing" the share. How about just copying a small sub set from PROD to TEST to be used for testing and verification purposes, if they are needed at all? (I would just create new ones, it takes a minute to upload a bunch of files to test with)I have an attempt to answer, which subset, since I don’t know what documents the files are connected too;-). Well, to keep additional share and copy means additional costs too. We will need to test and think further, thanks for confirmation of the limitations.Thanks for the scenario! One way to do it is to take the file name as seen in Docman (say, TE_DOC-4657860-1-1-1.JPG) and running them through an online Base64 encoder (like https://www.base64encode.org/)Encoding the file name (minus period and file extension) above will get you this:VEVfRE9DLTQ2NTc4NjAtMS0xLTE=Then look for that fil
@Mathias Dahl ok, thanks, that would be great from my perspective.Thanks for your inputs, we will update you with further progress of the transition. We need to move significant volume of docs from FTP and even more from DB.We are curious about the performance of the move, whether the functionality can handle hundreds or thousands of docs. We also hope to make our DB size significantly reduced by doing that.
Hi @Mathias Dahl,thanks for sharing, then it’s little bit odd to use the screen, since the selection can be limited by Doc Class only. See the count of the documents behind on the screenshot (sorted in descending) 😉
@Mathias Dahl of course for test I selected a doc class with approx. 250 documents behind and it went through within approx. 5 mins, however seeing the counts of the most heavy doc classes I don’t think we can run it for ¾ million of documents in 1 go, I guess we will have to split the transfer into some batches (probably by date) which is unf. not possible in the screen so most probably we will have to do it from backend. More over some of the documents have been archived in backup table in different DB schema, so not all the docs are really having file behind.
Hi @Sanjaya,yep, the configuration coming with the installation is wrong for NotifyMe, I have received correct values from IFS Support (sharing below) however it does not work anyway,. I’m following with them on this.Is there anybody having this working with remote deployment?NOTIFICATION_HUB_PATH - aurenanotifymeNOTIFICATION_HUB_URL -
Hi @JOOLSE/ @Sanjaya,I have just tested push notifications with original setting on apple device and it’s still not working for us. It seems even the flag for push notifications is not enabled with original notification hub setting.
Hi @JOOLSE and @Sanjaya,thank you for your inputs, yes, the issue I was referring to was connected to “Send Notification” command.I was following with IFS Support via this case Ticket Form for Case - Service Center (ifs.com) and they provided me another new notification hub connection details on Friday and good news, these seems to be working fine for Android and iOs!I don’t think it’s secure to share connection details here, so I can provide them on a private chat if you need.I have also summarized our review of Notify Me in this post.Thanks Jan
Hi IFS folks,good news, I was following on push notifications with IFS Support and they provided me another new notification hub connection details last week and these seems to be working fine for Android and iOs!Thanks Jan
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your username or 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.
