Expressions and Rules

Hi All,I have a requirement like theuser can map multiple fleet types & cost for 1 equipment. we are displaying the picker field where the user will choose equipmentId from some master table, they can select 1 equipmentid at a time. then an editable grid will be displayed below, to add/modify fleet types & cost.Now the challenge is i am getting index issue during save, If there are any existing mapping for respective equipment id, then when user selects the same equipmentId from picker, then editable grid should display existing mappings and user can add new rows also. If not, then user can add new mappings. For existing mapping they can change the cost alone or JE type alone, which needs to refreshed. Also when they not change the cost type, then instead of adding new row in DB, update in existing row for other field like dollar amount,updated by,updated On If they removed existing cost type, then change is_Active = 0 for those rows in DB.Need like below screenshot, and i have

Hi All,I’m seeing unexpected behavior with the Appian text() function when formatting a decimal value.For example:text("2.00000001", "0.0000000000")I would expect the output to be:2.0000000100 I’m getting:3.00000000000Has anyone encountered this behavior before?Is this related to how Appian is interpreting the first parameter as a number/decimal, or is there something specific about the text() format "0.0000000000" that I’m missing?Any explanation of why the value is being returned as 3.00000000000 would be appreciated.

The David Byrne Big Suit is one of the most distinctive costumes ever associated with a music performance. Its dramatically oversized shape turned a simple gray suit into a memorable cultural image. Worn by David Byrne during Talking Heads' celebrated performances, the outfit demonstrated how clothing can become an important part of a musician's artistic identity.The famous look is especially connected with Stop Making Sense, the acclaimed Talking Heads concert film. Even today, the image of Byrne performing in the enormous suit remains instantly recognizable among music and fashion fans.What Makes the David Byrne Big Suit Unique?The main feature of the David Byrne Big Suit is its exaggerated proportions. Instead of following the natural shape of the wearer, the jacket creates a large, boxy silhouette with dramatically broad shoulders.The trousers are also loose and oversized, helping maintain the unusual proportions throughout the outfit. The relatively simple gray color keeps attenti

Hello,I would like to ask about passing context information from a shared interface to a Record Action create form.BackgroundWe have a common Record Type that is shared and used by multiple applications.We created a common maintenance interface for this Record Type.  Interface: COMMON_recordTypeMaintEach application embeds this common interface to manage its own records.  Interface: APP_recordTypeMaintFor example:  COMMON_recordTypeMaint(    appName: "APP1"  )The calling application passes its application name (appName) to the common interface.RequirementWithin COMMON_recordTypeMaint, users can create, update, and delete records.When a user clicks Create, a Record Action is used to open the create form for the Record Type.The Record Type contains an appName field, and we would like this field to be automatically populated with the appName value that was passed from the calling application.For example:APP_recordTypeMaint↓XCOMMON_recordTypeMaint(appName: "APP1")↓Create Record Action↓Crea

Hi, We are facing a production issue in an application with a large volume of data. We display case counts using Expression Rules (ERs) and category-wise metrics using a Record Type-based Bar Chart. Although we apply filters on a few columns, when users select a 1-year date range, the queries process a significant amount of data and the ERs fail with:"Memory threshold reached during output conversion"The bar chart performance is also impacted due to the large dataset. We are looking for best practices to handle large-scale reporting and dashboard aggregation in Appian. Has anyone implemented an effective approach for such scenarios in production? Any suggestions or recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

I have worked across various applications. In my first application, we had 2,3 query rules for same record type but each serving a different purpose depending upon the field being queried or the amount of data being passed. In another project, we have a generic rule for each record type which is being used whenever we want to query the data. In one more project, I have seen only one generic rule being used for all record types which in turn means even the record type is being passed dynamically. I want to understand which approach makes more sense, pros and cons and do we really need to modularize everything this much.

Hi,Here is the scenario I am facing:I open an Expression Rule and implement my logic. I add several test cases to validate the expected behavior. I save the Expression Rule, which creates version 18. Later, I modify the Expression Rule code and save it again, which creates version 19. When version 19 is created, I can see that the test cases from version 18 are available in the new version.Could you please explain why, when I delete version 18 and refresh the latest version, all my test cases are lost?I would expect the test cases to be kept in version 19 since they were automatically carried over when the new version was created.I tried this on many ERs and observed the same behavior.Regards