Service Desk Practitioners Forum
cancel

Time stamp the information field

SOLVED
Go to solution
Highlighted
Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Time stamp the information field

Folk's

I would like to be able to use concatenation to update the information field with a time, date stamp and user id with each update the call get rather than add than use the history.
Is this possible?

Thanks Kieran
25 REPLIES
Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.
Solution

Re: Time stamp the information field

Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Thanks Mark

Is it the same in SD 5.0 and do I have to create the field information history?

Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Hi kieran,

should be the same, if not SP 2 is out which has the same functionality of OVSD 4.5 SP 17 which should enable it. As I remember you should be able to do this with your version.

You would need the second field - use a custom text field
Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Does the size fo custom field you use indicate the about of inromation it will hold. i.e if you use a 255k field it will start to over right info when the field gets full?

Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Hi Kieran,

I hope this is the answer that you are looking for.

The main field will be the 64k field and the update field will be the 4k field. So you cn enter up to 4k of characters (or there abouts). If you enter more than 4k of characters they wont appear.

If you use a 255 text field then that is the most ammount of characters that you can add for an update.

The restriction on the history lines fields will remain where they only show a certian number of characters regardless.

If this doesn't answer the last question can you specifya bit more.
Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Basically want I want to be able to do is with in the information field. Time and userid stamp each update so we can see who updated each entry rather than look at the history.

Thanks Kieran
Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

using the details provided from the above link you will set up the following

64k field=Information
4k field = Update

Everytime the call is saved any information will be appended to the persons name and time and formatted with a carraige return and ll this will then be appended to the 64k field. When the call is opened the 4k field will be cleared so that new updated can be entered and appended to what ever exists in the 64k field. This creates the log with time stamps and details of the person who did the update.

It will do what you are looking for saving the need to look at history lines to se up dates
Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Mark

Could I use the information field already on the form and create a new field call information history and take the updates from the information field?

Thanks Kieran

Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Hi Kieran,

you could bit you will be limited to the ammount of information that you can hold in the field by its size. In OVSD 5 do you have extra 64k text fields?



Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

We have 5 text 4000 fields, are these 64k fields?
Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

no they are not the same thing. You should have one custom code "text 65535" field wich is the largest text field available which is used to hold the running history with time stamps etc.

You will use one of the available "text 4000" fields for the user to add their update
Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Mark

Thanks I've sort of got it tork. How do you get it to clear the information field after it has updated information history and how do you get it to space out the updates so they are not bunched together

Thanks Kieran

Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Q1- use a UI rule to make empty the update field when the call is opened. Try a UI rule rather than a DB rule so that if the DB rule is slow firing the update is not removed too soon

Q2- in the document on the link to the other thread you will see that there are a number of concatenations. You need to concatenate the registration modified name with the space that will appear between the name and the date then another concatenation to add a carraige return that will then have a final concatenation to add the update.

Use the fixed attribute in the rule to add the spaces and carraige returns.

Read through the other link again and see how the concatenations are set up.

Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Hi

Still having difficulty with the formating. Can get the concantenation to work fine,but putting spaces and carriage returns it is proving to be tricky and further help here would be great

Thanks Kieran
Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Hi Kieran,

here is an attachment that Ruth had posted some time ago - (points for Ruth if she posts a respone here.

It mentions adding in new lines, same as carraige returns.

If you have it working but without the spacings you will need to add an extra concatenation for each space / carraige return.
Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

the line spacing still does not seem to work on 5.0, when yuo click on value field and press enter to indicate a carriage return it closes the dialogue box!!!

Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Hi Kieran,

not sure if it is a bug can test later this evening. Can you try instead to use the variable %line.separator% as the fixed value instead of the carraige returns that don't appear to be working
Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Tried that but just get %line.separator% text rather than the acual action when i excute the rule

thanks Kieran
Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

attached is the result I get with the rule I attached earlier....I hope it's not a 5.0 bug!!!
George M. Meneg
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Hello,

The %line.separator% doesn't work on SD5. To enter a new line, just double click on the title of the field. A "zoomed" window will open, there you can enter the newline by just pressing enter.
menes fhtagn
Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Hi Kieran,

I just got back into a test lab I have for Ver 5 (no SP's) and guess what. I cannot enter a fixed value for a carraige return and libe seperator variable will work as you have experiences (i.e. will print line seperator to the text field).

Options - try SP1 or SP 2 wjich has just been released or askk HP to confirm if thsi works in either SP.

Or create a custom text field. Use a template to set it to a value of a carraige return when you opena call. Then concatenate this "attribute" (not fixed value) to the rest of your DB rule. I hope the carraige return behaves as it should in the templates
Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Mark

do you have an example of the custom field with a carriage return working in a rule with concantenation.

Rgds Kieran
Kieran Maloney
Respected Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Tested the custom field and the Zoom in and tried a carriage return, both did not work it still put the concantinations one after the other. Looks like it is a bug!!!!!

Mark O'Loughlin
Acclaimed Contributor.

Re: Time stamp the information field

Hi Kieran,

I tried this last night trying to use the template to add a carraige return to a text field and then using this in a rule to post back - and you guessed it - it doesn't allow me to do that. It won't save a carraige return. You could ask hp if this is resolved in a hotfix or SP 1 / SP2.