lomixture Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 Good afternoon Today, we have had a few requests fail down our no match route. They were both the same category (Electrical), but logged to different locations. My colleage @Alisha and I have both checked it and cannot find a single reason why they would of failed and not followed their location pathway. Could this to be to do with the latest update? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 Are you able to provide what they are evaluating and what those values show as in the requests? is the value set after your latest get request information or before etc etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lomixture Posted October 10, 2023 Author Share Posted October 10, 2023 We have a get information right before the site allocation, nothing has changed about the sites or how we do it over the weekend and so I'm really struggling to see what is causing this. All our sites are allocated to a geographical division and the decisions are based off what site they chose > what division this is > what team looks after it. The failsafe no match is intermittently being used and I can't figure why! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 @lomixture when is the Site set on the request? Is it right before the Get Request Details? Further before? Captured during IC? Also worth checking on the example request that went through the "No Match" if indeed there was that site, specifically if that site Code is the one shown in the condition... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lomixture Posted October 12, 2023 Author Share Posted October 12, 2023 @Victor The site is set by a site selection node early on in the intelligent capture: Then in the workflow, there are two 'get request information' nodes before it gets to the site allocation to teams area of the flow shown in my previous reply. It should be noted that the Service Delivery team, which is our no match option, are not receiving every single job logged for our Facilities team, only a select few. The jobs they are receiving range across different categories, different locations and different teams. The flows are definitely not failing down the no match question set, because that is a basic free text option whereas the proper question sets we use are much more detailed and we can see these are being used in the incorrectly allocated jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 Do you find this to be the same suspect sites each time? It might be worth looking at the database direct for exactly what gets printed in the table as the site code and compare with the expression to see if there is some kind of mismatch somewhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Giller Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 Two things I notice - "East Division" looks more like a Site Name than a Site Code (this may be because you have unusual Site Codes, of course) and the Expression appears to have been created a very, very long time ago. If the Site Code is "East Division" you may find that recreating the decision expression (when will then look something like: depending on what source value you're examining) simply works. It is, of course, also possible that Sites have been updated in the Admin Tool and the Workflow has not been updated to keep up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lomixture Posted October 17, 2023 Author Share Posted October 17, 2023 As a large organisation covering 2 counties, with geographically located facilities staff, we use geographical divisions to allocate our sites to. I have added another 'get site info' just before the site allocation nodes to hopefully help, but will keep you posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lomixture Posted October 17, 2023 Author Share Posted October 17, 2023 On 12/10/2023 at 09:18, Jim said: Do you find this to be the same suspect sites each time? It might be worth looking at the database direct for exactly what gets printed in the table as the site code and compare with the expression to see if there is some kind of mismatch somewhere Not the same site, nor the same category. Also seems to be really adhoc so difficult to track examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lomixture Posted October 19, 2023 Author Share Posted October 19, 2023 @Steve Giller - the rewriting of the exact same expression worked. Can I ask why, writing the exact same thing but redoing it, works? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Giller Posted October 19, 2023 Share Posted October 19, 2023 @lomixture sorry that I can't find a less clumsy way of articulating this, but they're not exactly the same: is visibly not the same as As far as I can tell it's simply an age thing, and while every effort is made to ensure backwards compatibility it appears that in this specific case it simply needed updating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lomixture Posted October 19, 2023 Author Share Posted October 19, 2023 @Steve Giller however, I rewrote the code in the same format as your top example not the example you gave in the response post, so visually they are identical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lomixture Posted October 19, 2023 Author Share Posted October 19, 2023 I find Hornbill both fascinating and infuriating most days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now