Why can’t a non-Admin user see reservable spaces in organization?


We have some reservable spaces with system geography and system organization settings. A non-Admin user also has the same geography settings. There are security groups for reservations, and organizations and geography security groups are assigned to him. The geo and org security groups have the same geo and org as the space and profile. But the non-Admin user still isn’t able to see spaces.

He is only able to see them when the first level of the org hierarchy is provided in the group (i.e. \Organization). But as soon as the second level is given in the group, he isn’t able to see them. Can anyone help me on this? I think there is some issue in the org, but I don’t know exactly where it is.

[Admin: To see other related posts, use the Geography tag or Organizations tag.]

Continue reading

Advertisements

IV97700: Security group blocks calendar reservation information


We have a problem when we open a reservation from the calendar. It seems that when the user has a primary organization and he opens a reservation from My Calendar, the reservation window is opened, but it doesn’t show any information. However, if the user doesn’t have a primary organization, the reservation window is opened and it shows the information correctly.

When dealing with an organization, geography, and project security, you should use the user’s groups, not override groups. In Reserve, My Calendar, a user with an organization or geography is unable to open a reservation that was created. The security was not using the organizations or geographies from the user’s profile (groups) when determining the user’s access. Instead, it was using the overridden Reserve security group.

[Admin: To see other related posts, use the Reservation tag.]

Continue reading

How do you have a generic service plan for three organizations?


So I’m trying to figure out the best way to set this up. I have a service plan that has a facilities project template. In the facilities project template, I have three project tasks. In each of those project tasks, I have assigned a specific responsible organization by work group.

So my questions are: If I have three organizations that want to use this same service plan, but they want each of the project tasks to be specific to their responsible organization by work group, how can I just have one generic service plan to satisfy all three organizations? Is there any method to accomplish this requirement in TRIRIGA?

[Updated 06.23.17]

Alright, after some research, I found out the best way to have a generic request class, service plan, facilities project template, and project tasks is by setting up a service agreement for each service provider. And within each service agreement, by creating a service assignment matrix (SAM) for all the possible combinations of request class, customer organization, and location or geography.

Secondly, in the service plan, set the project and task assignment rule to “Auto-Assign to Service Provider”. This will ensure that the workflow fires to check for associated SAM matching records to set the responsible organization for the facilities project record, and the project tasks.

If possible, I would request for a service assignment matrix (SAM) order of precedence and process flow, because it is really confusing functionality. I had to basically deconstruct the workflow to understand which values were being retrieved by the request class, service plan, service agreement, and SAM. Does anyone else have thoughts on the SAM? And tips on how best to maintain it?

[Admin: This post is related to the 11.10.16 post about updating your existing service matrix records, the 09.02.16 post about clarifying how service matrix records are generated, and the 12.11.15 post about finding the process flow diagrams.]

Continue reading

Why doesn’t the SQL data match the viewed TRIRIGA application data?


Is anyone using the system organization for their security groups? We have noticed a problem to which IBM doesn’t seem to be giving enough any attention, and I’m wondering how many clients have even found this yet.

I posted the following statement in IBM developerWorks hoping to get some attention. We are starting to notice a few areas where the SQL data doesn’t match what is viewed in the application. Here is an example:

  • (1) First, you need a query that displays a list of leases and one of the columns is the system org. (Make sure that column has a user filter.)
  • (2) Now, note the system org name on one of the records.
  • (3) Go to that org record. Edit the org name (for example, add “test” to the end of it), and activate the org record.
  • (4) Go back to that query.
  • (5) The system org displays the new value on the lease and in the query.
  • (6) Enter a user filter for “test” in the system org column. But the query doesn’t recognize the edit…

[Admin: The same question is also posted in the main Application Platform forum. This post is related to the 01.04.17 post about filters failing when using changed classification values. To see other related posts, use the SQL tag or Filter tag.]

Continue reading

IV93595: Workflows in selecting a work resource is not optimized


Go to Tasks > Manage Work Tasks > Work Task. Click Add for a new work task. Create the draft. Go to the Resources tab, and click Find Organization. Select Organization and click OK. The Resources page takes 6-8 seconds for it to refresh and be available to the user for further action.

This process is a synchronous process. The time it can take to perform the action can vary based on the number of records being selected.

[Admin: A similar article is posted in the IBM Support Portal about slow performance when selecting an organizational resource for a work task. This post is related to the 02.01.17 post about a long-running workflow that hangs the form, and the 02.06.17 post about the TRIRIGA Workflow Analysis Utility. To see other related posts, use the Synchronous tag or Performance tag.]

Continue reading

IV95650: Headcounts are incorrect in graphics section reports


If we apply a report of level 1, and there are more than 1 person assigned to the same space sharing the same parent organization of level 1, the legend only counts 1 headcount, instead of more. Next, if we apply a report of level 2, and there are 2 people sharing the same parent organization of level 2, but they are located in different spaces, the legend counts correctly 2 people, because they are located in two different spaces. But if these 2 people are located in the same space, when we apply the report of level 2, the same error would happen.

We needed to add a check box to the “Graphic Query Report Options” to enable the sum aggregation to sum fields on a color by graphic report even when multiple “Group By” resolves to the same record for the same space. Moving forward, we added a check box to the “Graphic Query Report Options” to enable, when checked, the associated sum fields of graphic report with a “Group By” that is the same “Group By” value for the same space.

For example, suppose that you configure to sum a field on an associated area allocation of a space, where we group by that allocation’s associated organization’s parent. If a space has multiple associated allocations with associated organizations that are different, but have the same parent, then this situations applies. Legacy behavior is to only sum the field on the first allocation for a space (for each unique “Group By”). With the check box checked, the sum of the fields on all allocations will be added. This behavior is similar to how “Group By” works. We will be adding documentation about this new check box, and looking at how to better document the limitations of “Sum”, as well as the configuration of “Count”.

[Admin: To see other related posts, use the Group By tag.]

Continue reading