Clarity

I want to get sense of how many customers are using the auto-numbering feature in Studio to automatically generate their Project IDs?  (Ex:  For Projects, you set auto-numbering for your Investment ID).    If you are not using auto-numbering, why do you prefer to manually have the Project IDs entered from the UI?

Thanks,

Bill

We are using auto-numbering but it can be a bit of a pain when creating project’s / objects via the XOG Object services (the majority of PPM objects in our instance are created via code). Since Object services doesn’t return the code for objects that were created, I have to configure an attribute (mapping GUID) on each object type where I populate it with GUID that my code keeps track of.  With the GUID in place, I now can use XOG Query services to find my newly created object.

I would be nice if the XOG Object services response would provide a list of newly created codes in order of the request payload entities.

See:

https://communities.ca.com/ideas/235714262

https://communities.ca.com/ideas/103049849

https://communities.ca.com/ideas/103951113

V/r,

Gene

Coincidentally and in the same vein (even though the discussion wasn't about auto-numbering specifically): Re: Passing ProjectID as a part of XOGOutput

Hi Bill. We autonumber. Careful of the responses you get here - we won't be representative, but this is a great place to start.

No, don't auto-number on the couple of systems I'm involved in ; mostly because the Clarity "Project ID" is (rightly or wrongly) regarded as a piece of meaningful business data and is usually inherited from some other system (financial / sales etc).

Autonumbered for most anything we don't have a reason NOT to autonumber (Projects, Ideas, Custom Objects, everything). 

We have certain business needs why not to autonumber some investments like Applications, because the data originates in another system and we use that system's assigned ID number.

Bill,

We use autonumber for ID generation for almost all objects.

XOG writes with autonumbering are currently inconsistent in the product, any improvements would be welcomed.

Some objects cannot be autonumbered via XOG in a "supported" way (i.e. project)

Autonumbering and XOG - Default to 'autonumber=true' on all objects where autonumbering has been enabled

Bill,

We’ve been auto-numbering projects since ABT 5.2 – no problems.  We also use auto-numbering on risks, issues, change requests, ideas.

We don’t use auto-numbering on Departments or Locations – they are a number of different formats used as we are a collection of companies assembled over the years, with different finance systems in place.  Also, the Department and Location browse windows are not editable, so we can’t replace a generically numbered Department ID or Location ID on this windows with our meaningful, internal IDs in a custom attribute.  This is actually what we would prefer to do – we would prefer to use auto-numbering for Department and Location ID’s, as these IDs are used throughout the financial tables and cannot be easily updated if/when we establish a corporate wide standard.  We’d like to use the generic numbers where they can’t be updated, but then update the browse windows to display our meaningful numbers in a custom, editable attribute.

Makes sense?

At this point, one has, in many tables, a system generated UID and an auto-numbered ID, where neither are editable, and a third ID in a custom, editable ID field.  Do we really need 3 IDs?

Dale

Hey Dale,

Make sense.   The OBS is not Studio enabled hence you cannot auto-number  IDs nor does it allow to enter or update the ID.

Bill

Yes, we auto-number.  The text component contains a year YY value that gets changed at the start of each year.

It depends, for some customers yes.

For others no and reason is

1. different ID structure based on partition

2. variable in ID

We auto-number projects too. Just a number, no fancy patterns.  Works fine except for one division who need a reference to another external source, so they end up prefixing the project name with their reference, and ignore the Clarity value mostly.