Jump to content

Schema changes


Keith
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have just returned from vacation to find that our On Time Delivery (as reported in PowerBI) has fallen off a cliff.

It appears that the reason for this is a schema change whereby the values stored in the field h_withinfix (and probably other fields) have changed from numeric values of 0/1 to text i.e. Breached/Met. While these text values may make easier reading it has caused us issues with our reports. While I expect we will have to simply figure something out on our end now it would have been good to get a heads up that this was changing (or did I miss something). 

Can you find a way to communicate such changes better in future.

 

Thanks

 

Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Keith I believe these fields were changed in 1073:

On 16/10/2017 at 9:49 AM, Harry Hornbill said:

Improved formatting of flag-type columns when running reports against Service Manager.

I am not sure what to say about the Power BI integration but I can understand the inconvenient :( ... Perhaps our dev or product management team have more insight into this change...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with @Keith- my admin lost half a day trying to figure out why his report wasn't working. He noticed this on the 18th October.

I was going to post something here but got sidetracked - didn't realise the this was changed at the schema level.

We were using API's to pull data to create our reports (this was before the ibridge and the powerbi connector were available).

Nasim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, this was a breaking change that should not have happened and so please accept my apologies for the disruption and inconvenience. I think its appreciated that from time-to-time mistakes occur, although in this particular case it would seem that the ''mistake' was intentional and I understand why that is of concern. It is important to us here at Hornbill that we ensure that the updates provided to the Hornbill platform and applications are seamless and this change was not compatible with that philosophy. I will be discussing with the Development team measures to prevent a similar reoccurrence in the future. On the immediate issue, I have also asked Product Specialists to get in touch in the morning about resolving this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Paul Davis appreciate the prompt response - and the sort of answer I want to hear. We need confidence the work we are doing is not going to break because of a change elsewhere. I know it happens very rarely but still good to know you are on the looking at reducing this type of change (esp schema type).

Nasim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...