Chris_Hackett

Chat Transcript - CA PPM Office Hours: A Live Online Chat (May 2017)

Discussion created by Chris_Hackett Employee on May 12, 2017

Miss the May PPM Office Hours - Online Chat? Check out what you missed below and be sure to join us in June for the next session!

 

from Chris Hackett (CA) to everyone:

@Martti Hey there, Martti. This isn't actually Chris -- but one of his colleagues, filing in for him today. Welcome!

from Martti K to everyone:

Hello "@Chris", did not seet that as I did not have chat opened.

from Chris Hackett (CA) to everyone:

@Martti My name is Lenn Thompson, btw. I'm the Mainframe area community manager for CA.

from Martti K to everyone:

@Lenn pleased to have made you aquaintance

from Martti K to everyone:

Was there ever autoschedule seletect tasks/partial autoschedule option or was on the roadmap?

from Lino E to everyone:

Is there a way to assign multiple resources to an incident?

from Art Vendryes to everyone:

Is there a documentation somewhere that provides a matrix of recommended scheduling of jobs?

from Nick Darlington (CA) to everyone:

@Martti: You are probably quite familiar that the current options have been to either select specific task in Workbench and recalculate them (from a resource loading / efforting point of view), but that Autoschedule only had a couple of limited constraints affecting its task selection, such as by a given date.  We are not aware of any plans about changes to this, and I think it would be best pursued through an Idea on the communities if there is a driving need or capability desired for that.

from Martti K to everyone:

@Nick thanks that is what I thought

from Nika Hadzhikidi (CA) to everyone:

@Lino - only one resource can be assigned to an incident currently. However if you want to have multiple resources assigned/notified you could create a generic resource with a distribution list and assign it to the incident, then if a specific resource picks it up then they can assign themselves.

from Art Vendryes to everyone:

I know an Admin has the ability to set MSP mappings.  Is there a similar funcition for OWB?  I.E. turning off a PM's ability to turn a project on or off for time entry

from Lino E to everyone:

Thats what I thought, we're looking to have multiple people able to book time though. I'll see if there is a relevant idea out there

from C. Vogt to everyone:

I am looking for a way to populate the Team object attribute “(RSF) Resource Person Type” from the Resource Object attribute “Person Type”. Can you recommend an approach that would allow us to synchronize the two attributes and keep them synchronized so we can use the information in the Resource Planning portlets?

from Nick Darlington (CA) to everyone:

@Art: About the job schedules, we have the following knowledge article that is updated to contain our consensus advice for this, it isn't updated frequently as such, but we do modify it to keep it as current as we know: https://www.ca.com/us/services-support/ca-support/ca-support-online/knowledge-base-articles.tec528729.html

from Art Vendryes to everyone:

@Nick, thank you

from Nika Hadzhikidi (CA) to everyone:

@Art - I don't think the same functionality is available as you would want, but there might be something that could help. Check out https://www.ca.com/us/services-support/ca-support/ca-support-online/knowledge-base-articles.tec601365.html

from Art Vendryes to everyone:

@Nick, thank you I will check it out

from Art Vendryes to everyone:

Is it recommended to use the Allocate from Estimates function on the team tab?  It looks like allocation segments get created that might impact auto-schedule when project schedule changes are made

from Ramana to everyone:

is it possible to parameterize the conditional Styles and pass the field1, field2,,, in a jaspersoft report instead of duplicating the same conditions for all fields?

from Nika Hadzhikidi (CA) to everyone:

@C.Vogt - (RSF) Resource Person Type is used on Team in order to be able to do Resource Finder replacement correctly (used also with Roles). We will have to find out how exactly you're using this feature before suggesting anything. Please feel free to raise a case with us in Support to look into this

from C. Vogt to everyone:

@Nika, thank you for the suggestion

from Nick Darlington (CA) to everyone:

@Art: I don't know that it would impact auto schedule per se, as you are basically bringing the allocations to be in-line with the task schedules and assignments that are already set.  I would think it's more about how you do your planning of projects and whether you have a simple enough situation to have PMs go in and create schedules that can simply pull in allocations to match (via confidence and knowledge of the resource availabilities), or you have a more complex resource allocation process that needs people to be booked and approved before it's sure that the allocation requirements could be met.  In that sense it's not a recommendation either way really, just a choice.

from Art Vendryes to everyone:

@Nick, thank you.  I will check into it further and do more testing

from Nika Hadzhikidi (CA) to everyone:

@Ramana - I would say no at this point, I haven't seen this to be possible. However if you want we can confirm this with Jaspersoft Support. Log a case and we can check this out with them as well.

from Ramana to everyone:

@Nika, thank you 

from Martti K to everyone:

@Art:  There is some more on scheduling jobs in

from Martti K to everyone:

https://communities.ca.com/message/241722838

from Martti K to everyone:

and

from Martti K to everyone:

https://communities.ca.com/docs/DOC-231152103

from Art Vendryes to everyone:

@Martti thanks

from Ramana to everyone:

How many threads will be fired from application to the databse if the Dashboard has 'N' portlets. Is it atleast 'N' threads? 

from Nick Darlington (CA) to everyone:

@Ramana: currently at least, it will happen inside 1 thread.. it's the same thread responsible for receiving a user's request, and coming up with the response for it.  As an application that has to scale for many concurrent users, it doesn't try and parallelize this further.

from Nick Darlington (CA) to everyone:

@Ramana: this is internal implementation though, so no guarantees about how this behaviour will or won't change for the future

from Chris Hackett (CA) to everyone:

@Everyone Do we have any other questions for the team?

from Art Vendryes to everyone:

None for me at this time

from Lino E to everyone:

nope

from Art Vendryes to everyone:

thank you for your assistance

from Martti K to everyone:

Not form me, thanks

from C. Vogt to everyone:

nothing here

Outcomes