My requirement is to create a new Questionnaire-target pair of record for if it already doesnot exists against newly completed Privacy assessment(Q1).
How can we create a A2A datafeed which will generate 1 target application record and 1 Questionnaire record.
I guess may be using the Key mapping (if no match found then create a new record in cross ref also).
but I need to know the details around it.
Input: report from a questionnaire say Q1. (Q1 has target T1)
Output: record in Questionnaire Q2 and its Target application say T2
what should be the target of DF?
what field must to include in report?
Any new field field I need to create?
what field in source to map with Target application cross reference?
Any help will be deeply appreciated.
This is a very strange question. Only you yourself can answer it since you have the requirements. High level answers:
what should be the target of DF?
Application, since you may need to create a record there first.
what field must to include in report?
You need to include the field you plan to use as a key field in the app.
3.Any new field field I need to create?
No, unless you have a requirement to create one.
what field in source to map with Target application cross reference?
The field you plan to use as a key.
Good luck!
Related
I want to generate an IDOC file to make shop orders availabe to the R/3 SAP System. My question is concerning BELNR in E2EDK01. As we dont have the possibility to use Webservices and BAPI, we only make the data available via files.
Actual questions are:
Do i yet need a [BELNR] in the IDOC file?
If yes, where to get this [BELNR] from?
E2EDK01-BELNR is the order number of the ordering party, normally it is not needed, but useful.
Example:
The customer sends an order and is unsure if the order received you. So he sends the order again. Now you have two similar orders. You can't know, if there are two similar orders or if you have two idocs for the same order.
If E2EDK01-BELNR is filled with the order number of the customer system, you can decide how to proceed (e.g. ignore the 2nd idoc).
If I understand your question correct, you create the order out of your shop system. You could offer an (optional) field like 'Your order number' and use this. If the same order number (per customer) is used again you can make a warning ("Order X is already ordered").
If you don't want this field you could use the session id to identify double postings.
I have a FIX application which is connected to several price providers. It distributes the data it received to our inner applications. When it is sending the received messages from the price providers to the target applications, it modifies the SendingTime(52) field in FIX header which is not acceptable. The inner applications want to get the original SendingTime value. How can I say to the QuickFIXJ engine not to assign a timestamp value?
Thanks
What you desire... is kind of wrong. Header fields are to be used by the engine, and for application data (which is what this relayed SendingTime kind of is on the second leg). Your inner FIX connection should not be clobbering the SendingTime field. You might need the actual SendingTime field if you are diagnosing problems with your inner connection!
What you really need is a second SendingTime field. You should edit the DD of your inner FIX applications to add another field for which to store the old SendingTime value. Tell your inner target apps to refer to that field.
NOTE: You probably don't want to use OrigSendingTime (tag 122) for this. That field has a very specific usage already. Name your new field something else.
FIX Market Data messages (35=W, 35=X) usually have MDEntryDate (#272) and MDEntryTime (#273) fields to represent the timestamp of the market data price. If it is related to Quote/trade messages, you may have the TransactTime (#60) field.
It worth keep the SendingTime (#52) and MDEntryDate MDEntryTime/TransactTime separated, you can compare the difference between the price's timestamp and the counter party's infra structure timestamp (sending time). It would help to identify delay between the systems.
If the message you are handling does not have any Application DateTime field, you can pick one. which its value would be the SendingTime for the original FIX message you've received.
You can either select and use an existent field (http://www.onixs.biz/fix-dictionary/4.4/fields_by_name.html) or you can create your own user defined field.
Once you decided to create your own field, it is a good practice to check the oficial Global Technical Committee user defined fields list at https://www.fixtrading.org/standards/user-defined-fields/ and using the user defined fields range.
Sites
Fields by message: https://www.onixs.biz/fix-dictionary.html
User defined fields: https://www.fixtrading.org/standards/user-defined-fields/
This is a bit of a complex, abstract question, so forgive me if it's not specific enough.
I've encountered a specific type of problem numerous times: That on one hand, a data source is used to update a certain data structure in an automated fashion at regular intervals, but on the other hand, stakeholders want to be able to manually override the automated entries.
Example:
You have a list of products, which are kept up-to-date (title, description, etc.) by some automated script which uses external data sources (product databases, etc.).
Let's say that in your data source you have a toaster "Freshtoast XYZ 300" and if its name changes to "FreshToast! XYZ-300", you want to propagate that update into your own (differently structured) product model.
At the same time, if a co-worker doesn't like the name "Freshtoast XYZ 300" and wants to change it to "Toaster XYZ 300 by Freshtoast" (manually), you don't want to override that change automatically (he would get angry), but you also don't want to simply ignore the updated name, since if the co-worker knew about the change, he'd adjust the name to "Toaster XYZ-300 by FreshToast!".
What's the best method to "consider" updated data sources - even for overridden data - while still allowing manual override?
PS: I'm using mostly Ruby / Rails, but I guess the question is very general. Also, to be clear, automated updates are the rule, while manual overrides are the exception in this scenario. So let's say 200,000 products get updated every single day, only 20 of which have manually overridden titles. So, for example, having to approve every single update is not an option.
Here goes nothing...
Hands off approach: Add a string column to products table that contains a serialized list of user-touched columns. Anytime a user touches a column in the products table, put it in the serialized list. When the automatic updater hits that record it checks the list for columns it should ignore.
Hand-wringing micro-manager approach: Use a versioning library (e.g. vestal_versions gem) and add a user_id column to the products table. Anytime a user-touched record is automatically updated, send them a notification and allow them to view a before/after which they can approve or reject.
We currently have a Jira instance and I have had another odd request to sort the posts by the number of customers affected. Is this at all possible or will this require some custom work on my part?
Simplest is to add a customer impact number to your configuration (a custom field of type number) and bump it each time a new customer is added to the company name field.
You might even add a simple javascript which automatically sets the field if the company name field is modified ...
I'm using an embedded relation to allow the user to edit/add books to a library and in the same form to add/remove n authors who wrote the book within the auto generated admin.
Here is my problem: An authors name is unique, so when I enter an author that already exists the sfValidatorDoctrineUnique produces the error.
An object with the same "name" already exist.
What I want to do is catch this error and tell the form not to try to add the exisiting author anew.
Do I use the event system for that, or modify the validators or how can I do that?
thank you very much
hoodie
PS:
after some searching I found something that might be a solution but I haven't made it work yet
http://symfonyguide.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/symfony-forms-saving-process/
I my opinion you should not to add new author if it already exists.
sfDoctrineActAsTaggablePlugin do the same way. It searches for an existing tags and merge them with current (added by user from form) tags.
But here is one issue: Two authors - Aleksander Pushkin and Alexander Pushkin, is it same authors for us, but different for machine.