#Guys help me, its very urgent situation. i am doing data migration from po

vikrams290 over 9 years ago

#Guys help me, its very urgent situation.
i am doing data migration from portal to tempo. in portal data and tempo data, there is some diffrence so thats why i am not able to one user filter(facets ), that can filter these all data .

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex:-
Older data :- Physics (stored into datacase)
New data :- PHYSICS

I want to put single filter like
Student
|- Physics - that can filter both data togather.
|- Chemistry

once i click Physics, it will filter those record who having "PHYSICS" and "Physics" value.

Discussion posts and replies are publicly visible

0 Tim
Certified Lead Developer
over 9 years ago

What is the underlying source of the record type?
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 KARTHIK NATARAJAN
Certified Lead Developer
over 9 years ago

One workaround would be to use proper() function.. in your case just try proper("PHYSICS") in your filter value..Hope this helps!
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 KARTHIK NATARAJAN
Certified Lead Developer
over 9 years ago

Ignore my previous comment, if you are looking for the combination of both values.
You may need to update the older data to be capitalised backend in the database (or) save the new values similar to the older ones.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 vikrams290 over 9 years ago

thanks @ Karthikn ,but i want to know, is it possible to filter multiple value with single filter.
ex. pv!tPhysics will check or("PHYSICS","Physics").
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 vikrams290 over 9 years ago

@ tim.clarke its entity backed record.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 ramakg
A Score Level 1
over 9 years ago

Vikram, you can build a query rule like this and the sample code as follows:
a!queryFilter(
field: "tRequestStatus",
operator: if(local!requeststatus="Open","not in",if(or(local!requeststatus="Completed",local!requeststatus="Cancelled"),"in","=")),
value: if(local!requeststatus="Open",{"Cancel","Cancelled","Complete","Completed","Terminate"},
if(local!requeststatus="Completed",{"Complete","Completed"},
if(local!requeststatus="Cancelled",{"Cancelled","Cancel"},
local!requeststatus)))
)),
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 sikhivahans over 9 years ago

@vikrams Hi, it seems to me that you are making use of Process Backed Records. To the one of the following 3 options might give leads over the issue:

1. Update the pv!tPhysics in the process by making use of Shared Components such as IFM or Get PV Set PV etc.
2. Build the facets by making use of Expression Editor which I believe is available from 16.1 on-wards.
3. You may turn your Process Backed Records to Service Backed Records where you can provide facets as per your wish. This helps you if you aren't able to utilise the above option but the downside is that the configuration would be time consuming.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 Tim
Certified Lead Developer
over 9 years ago

As this data now resides in your rdbms you should be considering normalisation as part of your migration procedures so setting all the values to either uppercase or initcap. As pointed out above you can use the 'in' operator if you switch to using expression backed records but you'll be adding a high level of complexity that might be unnecessary. You could also consider creating a database view to manipulate the data on the server side using one of the native text functions. Your top priority should be data consistency though.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel