Hornbill Staff DR

Hi Lauren,  thanks for the update. If I may consider the blank fields in the catalog item configuration, I've experienced something very similar when working on a customer site recently. However, in my case, after a few seconds the pro cap and bpm that i'd originally configured would appear in the fields. This was, at times, a good 2 - 4 seconds delay but it seems to be an issue loading the information rather than anything wrong with what has been set and stored. Are you able to confirm that when this occurs the pro cap and BPM values do eventually appear? How frequently are you experiencing this? On the topic of the Switch Capture node, values will certainly disappear if the flow specified is deleted. Aside from that there shouldn't be any reason why this would happen. As the node stores the ID of the flow behind the scenes, renaming the flow is not an issue. Are you able to give me an example of the flow that was specified in the node and then disappeared? I would suggest monitoring the situation and gathering more information on the frequency at which it occurs. Is there a particular point in time when this started happening? Thanks, Dan

Hi Lauren,  thanks for your post. It sounds like you are experiencing two different issues: "....intermittent issue where the Catalogue items within Services 'forget' the flow they are supposed to be attached to." I think I need a bit more clarification on this one. 1) Do you mean that tickets are being successfully raised against a service but sometimes the tickets don't have a BPM associated (i.e. there is no green progress bar visible at the top of a ticket) OR 2) When you view the configuration of a catalog item, the two fields where you specify a Pro Cap flow or BPM are empty? OR 3) Something different "Similarly, we've also had it within progressive captures where the 'Switch Capture' option forgets where it's supposed to point to". In relation to this one, do you experience a perpetually spinning Hornbill icon during progressive capture? This typically occurs when a progressive capture flow reaches the Switch Capture node but it cannot identify the flow that it must switch to in order to continue the progressive capture experience. Here, it is necessary to understand how you are determining which flow to switch to. Is it based on the selection of a catalog item, or is it specifically referencing the name of another flow? If its the former (which is usually how the out-of-box flows are set up) can you confirm that a catalog item is being selected by the analyst each time? Thanks, Dan ÂÂ

Hi Dan,  thanks for your post. This is a request that would not normally be fulfilled by Hornbill Support as it is effectively an administrative task. From what I can tell the tickets logged were not as a result of any fault or defect with the platform or applications, which would be the situation where we would perform such an activity. Do you feel that this is the case? In the absence of a multi-select cancel option, the solution would be to work through each request and cancel using the appropriate action button within the ticket. An alternative could be found in the form of the Hornbill Clean Utility (https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Hornbill_Clean_Utility). This tool can acheive the desired result as it has the ability to permanently delete request data based on a list of request references. However, such a tool should be used with extreme caution as mistakes (incorrect references etc.) in the configuration file could be costly. If you would like to enlist our Expert Services team to perform this task for you, we would be more than happy to do so and this service can be requested via the Hornbill Success Portal, available at: https://success.hornbill.com/hornbill/  Aside from the options above, I'm sorry that on this occasion I cannot be of more help. Dan ÂÂ

Hi Paul,  thanks for your post. The addition of connections seems to be ancillary to the primary requirement which is to communicate with a broader group of individuals more efficiently. In this case, the group of individuals is composed of those that are currently the customers of linked requests. The feature that would be applicable here would be in the form of a bulk email from the request list (which would be along the lines of what Nasim mentioned) , or the ability to apply an update to all linked requests and, if that was an email update, send an email to the customer of the request as part of that action. Unfortunately, that specific capility doesn't currently exist within Service Manager. I understand there are plans for its introduction but at present I can't supply any further detail on timescales etc. I can see that you are trying to accomplish this through the use of connections, which is potentially the best solution when it comes to emailing a group of individuals, as we can add connections quickly to an email. However, as you point out the association of a connection is ad-hoc and doesn't occur at any particular point in the life-cycle of an incident. If an action is ad-hoc, the BPM is not be best-placed to facilitate this and so it would be questionable whether a BPM operation you describe would give you the value that you desire. Self Service Bulletins offer a mechanism to broadcast information to customers. Of course, it depends what information you are trying to convey in these bulk updates. If it's a generic holding response a bulletin could serve this communication need,  if it relates to detailed resolution steps, then this suggestion may be less appropriate. Could you elaborate more on the type/content and frequency of communication that takes place as part of your Major incident process? Thanks, Dan ÂÂ

Hi Hayley,  I've taken a look at the web form and the problem has been rectified. The usual options should be available to you shortly as it takes a few minutes for the changes to take effect. In the mean-time I can log a ticket on your behalf and be in touch momentarily. Best Regards, Dan

Hi All,  I noticed that this thread seems to have yet to reach a conclusion. The initial query was around adding Connections to a request via BPM, specifically the ability to add Basic Users as connections. I can confirm that since Service Manager build 1099 the "Add Connection" BPM operation now allows us to add Basic Users as connections. This is done via the "Co-Worker" option which now incorporates a pick list where you can specify whether Basic users, Full users, or All Users will be available when searching and choosing the co-worker (see image). For those interested in adding Contacts as connections, this is also possible with this node. Set the Co-Worker Option to "ignore", set the "Contact" option to "Manual", and specify the Contact. I hope that helps, Dan

Hi All,  our infrastructure team identified a process that was consuming an unusual amount of resources. They have dealt with this process which should now have resolved all the performance/server connection issues. All effected instances will now be operating as normal. Please accept our apologies for this short period of disruption. Work will commence to understand the specific nature of the issue and steps taken to safeguard against this in future. Dan

Hi Sam,  thanks for your post. We are aware of this issue effecting Internet Explorer and plan to release a build today that will address it. This issue is restricted to IE and so other browsers will load the list without a problem. Dan

Hi Tom, we are aware of the issue and our infrastructure team are currently working to resolve this. Further information will be posted as and when it becomes available via the Hornbill forums at the following thread: Please monitor this for the latest updates. Best Regards, Daniel

Hi Lucy,  its great to hear that you have managed to get this working using a different variable in your custom expression, however if the BPM is no longer able to evaluate the Catalog id then this sounds like an issue that our Support team should look into. As your organisation has purchased the Hornbill Premier Success Plan, I would advise logging a request with our Support team via our web form: https://www.hornbill.com/support/ . If you could download and attach the original BPM definition that will help them investigate further. Thanks, Dan

Hi Keith,  this would I did follow up as Paul had instructed, however the number I called didn't offer me the opportunity to leave a voicemail. An email follow up would have been sensible here, but admittedly on this occasion that is something I did not do. Please accept my apologies for that. I will be attempting to get in touch again today. Best Regards, Daniel

Hi Evan, thanks for your post.  I'm pleased to see that you have found our roles wiki page useful. With the broader Hornbill community in mind, I think this is a great opportunity to re-visit what "Hornbill" is (as a product). If I may use your initial post as a starting point, the error shown is indicating that the user doesn't have rights to the application called "Hornbill Document Manager". As I'm sure you're now aware, your image of the assigned Security roles shows that this user primarily has a range of Hornbill Service Manager related roles and currently there are no Document manager roles associated to this user account. When we talk about "Hornbill" we are not talking about a single stand-alone application. "Hornbill" is a powerful powerful platform capable of running an array of business collaboration applications that help teams create content, share ideas and feedback, and optimize operations to deliver better customer experiences. Hornbill Service Manager is one such application you can install on the Hornbill Platform. This means that you could have a Hornbill instance purely serving your organisations Collaboration and Document Management needs and as such each application, once installed, presents its own set of security roles that must then be associated to those users who need access to that application to carry out their day-to-day duties. More information can be found here: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Getting_Started Dan

Hi Lightsource thanks for your post! Clearing down test tickets can be done using the "Hornbill Clean Utility". All the details can be found here: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Hornbill_Clean_Utility . If you have any queries about using it, please don't hesitate to post them here. This will clear down all tickets, or target the deletion based on request type (i.e. incident, service request, problem, etc.) Dan

Hi James,  thanks for your post. I'd be inclined to create some request list "Views". This allows you to be selective in terms of what you view in your request list at any one time. You choose what to include in your view by selecting various conditions such as "Service is "Purchasing" " or "Summary Contains "Invoice" " etc. What conditions you choose will depend on what works best for you. You can give your View a name to reflect what it shows (in my image I have called mine "New Starter Requests"). Once you have created a view you can share it with your team, or with other teams to ensure that everyone is working with the same view. More information on Request List Views can be found here: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Request_List_Views I hope that helps, Dan ÂÂ

Hi Mark,  would you allow us to log into your instance and have a look at this specific incident? Thanks Dan

Hi Mark,  thanks for your post. Does this happen for only one request, or is it every request you open? When was the request logged? Dan

Hi Darren,  thanks for confirming the changes have been successful in addressing the memory leak. I have followed up with development in relation to your most recent comment regarding the application not existing upon completion and I understand that they are currently looking into this. Dan

Hi Prathmesh,  development have been able to identify the root cause of the error and can see that it will present itself when an impact analysis has been performed against the request but the resulting impact value has since been deleted from the instance. This means it throws the error when trying to load the related impact record, which no longer exists. I can see that at the moment you have two records effected by this: IN00031729 and IN00032043. I think the best approach is to re-associate an existing impact. I can see that you have three, "Critical", "Medium", and "Low". Do you recall what impact was associated to the two requests stated? Thanks, Dan

Thanks Prathmesh So, I gather that the call is visible in the request list but upon clicking it, the request does not load but just generates the error? Please can you provide the reference number of the call? Once you have provided this we will be able to take this issue further. Would it be OK for me to access your instance to investigate with the call in question? Thanks, Dan

Hi Prathmesh,  thanks for your post. I wanted to get a bit more information about the call that is showing this error. 1) Does it have a BPM associated to it (i.e. there is a green progress bar visible at the top of the call). If yes, is part of the progress bar red? 2) What date was the call logged and closed? Many Thanks, Dan

Hi Chris,  thanks for your post. I believe the issue here is the type of JOIN you are using. A standard JOIN will only return records when there is a corresponding record in both tables. You should change your report to use a LEFT JOIN. A LEFT JOIN will return all records in the left table (h_itsm_requests) and the matching records in the right table (h_sys_contact). The reason why some request records will not show a company name is indeed because the customer of these requests will be Basic users whos details are held in h_sys_accounts. I hope that helps, Dan

Hi Sam,  as arranged, we look forward to speaking with you tomorrow to discuss your needs. Dan

Hi James,  thanks for your post,  each application has its own entity viewer which will give you more detail about the database tables and their field relationships. In relation to Service Manager this can be viewed in Hornbill Administration > Service Manager . You will need the "Advanced Reporting Admin" security role to access this. A little more detail can be found on the following wiki page, https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Application_Entity_Viewer I hope that helps, Dan ÂÂ

Hi Darren,  thanks for your post. I can see some discussions taking place on our workspaces and it appears a possible cause has been identified. I have asked development to post an update as soon as they know more. Dan

Hi Alex,  Development have identified the issue and are working on an appropriate solution. In conjunction with my earlier suggestion, a more feasible longer-term workaround is to associate the "Self Service User" role to all your Hornbill users. If you navigate to Hornbill Administration > Home > System > Organisational Data > Roles and type in "Self Service User" in the filter this will present you with the right role. Click into the role and navigate to the last tab (the furthest right) labelled "Assigned Users" . Click the button shown in the screen shot and proceed to associate the role to all "Full" users. this will prevent the issue from re-occurring. If your attempts at a BPM restart were previously unsuccessful, after you have associated this role to all users a BPM restart will be possible. Dan