Propose your fantastic ideas regarding the Thinkwise Platform to our Product Team.
The current way of editing a Stored Procedure returns the following method to create the syntax on the database:if exists (select 1 from sysobjects where name = 'stored_proc_name' and type = 'P') drop procedure stored_proc_namegocreate procedure stored_proc_nameasbeginHowever, when using Query Store, the relevant data will be untrackable as the object_id is different after creating.A possible solution would be to make use of the CREATE OR ALTER dbo.stored_proc_nameASBEGINThis makes sure the object_id isn't changing, so performance impact of the new version can be tracked more easy and if a specific plan is forced, this won't break.
When validating prefilters that are changed from query to prefilters column it returns errors because the prefilter contains a query and a ‘prefilter column’.My idea is a simple solution by setting the query to NULL when choosing ‘prefilter columns’
Hi all,I recently did an uprade to new platform version and faced some issues. This forced me to restore a DB and fix the issues and rerun the process again until it was running successfully. This is costing me time to go through the process a few times. I suggest that the code script are written in a way that you can run as many times as you want without the need to restore DBs. For each statement that will be generated for the upgrade should have a delete statement right before it. It is already in place in other areas why not in the upgrade of IAM or SF.
Disable certain columns from exporting and if exportable, provided with at least a db_column header.A lot of our grid screens have columns that are expressions that show some sort of indication – for example a checkbox or some sort of status. Such columns do not have a translation (actually a space ‘ ‘), most of the time they have an icon in the column itself which says enough.Exporting such a column will mostly make sense for someone that doesn’t have to import it back again. Say for example a certain material order record has a status out-of-stock. Someone might want to export such a list and send it to someone to come up with alternative materials.It would be nice to be able to register in the SF that certain columns are not exportable to overcome the issue that it would imply that they are importable.It would also be nice if there is no translation registered (such as a space ‘ ‘) that the export would provide the DB column name.rgds Ricky
While you can choose the unit test type ‘Subroutine’ (i.e. functions and procedures), the analysis of unit test program object coverage does not take functions into account. This should be added to the cube.
I would like to propose the idea of having an Indicium debug mode.Currently if Indicium throws and error whiles using the Universal UI the user will get the following message “Unknown Error”. I can understand that we do not want to bother end users with specific database error messages.However it would be very useful if you can enable the display of such error message in the indicium settings. Currently when a client of mine gets this error message (unknown error) they will submit a ticket with a screenshot of this error message. That means that I have to go through the Indicium log and hope to identify the error message that was related to the message the client received. And to make matters worse, if you have load balancer enabled it can be a big issue determining which Indicium the client was logged into. Which makes finding the Indicium error near to impossible.Therefor it would be super useful have a setting which you can enable that will results in the actual database error message instead of the unknown error message.
When a query is slow and takes more time then for example 1 minute create automatic a log to the thinkwise folder (no database action).
In the data model generate and create the table tags for one table and display the sql script to synchronise to a database.
Currently a parameter of a task can have a lookup configured and the lookup control can be set to “Combo”, “Auto complete” etc etc.We would like to see a new option: “Contains words” or something in that matter. The functionality would be similar to Contains, but rows are selected like when using a combined filter in a grid.Below a taks with one parameter. The lookup control is defined as "Suggestion contains”. If a tabel contains the following valuesKleppen en injectoren afstellenKleppen en deksels afstellenKleppendekselpakking vervangen And the user types Kleppe afstelI'd like to see Kleppen en injectoren afstellenKleppen en deksels afstellen As the resulting options to choose from
Currently the only way to generate/deploy a view which is configured based on the option Auto or Meta Custom is through all of the the deployment steps. This is very time consuming (10-20 min each time). Often to identify whether the view is configured correctly you need to deploy more then once.It would be very usefully if you have the option to deploy a specific view via a screen, just as you can deploy a view which is based on a template.
In an action flow I have the ability to read/write/move/delete files and folders. I have no option to get a list of files inside of a folder. This would be very helpful. Currently I have an external document generator that creates PDF files and puts them on a file share. The filename convention of the generator contains a timestamp and some other variables that I am not aware of. Because of this I can’t READ FILE since I don’t know when the file was generated or what other variables are part of it’s file name.
When you start working on your project the amount of tables is often not that vast. However as you progress the list of tables and number of tables sharing parts of their name will become a lot bigger. This will make it more difficult to select a specific table or view to display in the datamodel designer, since there is no filter available here.It would really help having a filter bar on top of the list of tables to display in the datamodel designer.
If I have a lot of details in one screen, I mainly use grids instead of grid and form. But if I want to add a record I have to use add in grid or make a task to add a record. It would be really nice to have generated CRUD tasks, this would prevent modelling the same thing multiple times.
We require a change of the translations of the “Forgot Password” link in the Universal Login page as well as the subsequent screen objects in Indicium Universal as they do not really correspond to our liking.Idea:There needs to be a way to have access to the translations of these screen objects to be customizable according to the corresponding audience that is using the application.
Since a recent version of the Software Factory it is possible to create unique indexes that exclude NULL values. This is a useful feature, however, I think it would be great if we can take it one step further.I’d like to propose the possibility to create filtered indexes, where the developer him/herself can supply a where clause that will be applied to the index.For myself, I have this working using some dynamic model fiddling, but I think it would be pretty straight-forward to implement as a default feature.This is an example from the index script that is being created using my adjustment:/* Create index 'ix_un_def_dimensions_len' on table 'article_default_dimension'. */*snip*create unique nonclustered index ix_un_def_dimensions_len on "article_default_dimension"( article_id, default_length)where default_width is nullgo/* Create index 'ix_un_def_dimensions_len_width' on table 'article_default_dimension'. */*snip*create unique nonclustered index ix_un_def_dimensions_len_width on "article_default_dimension"( article_id, default_length, default_width)where default_width is not nullgoThese indexes ensure that I can have unique records for either article_id / length where width has not been provided and have unique records for article_id / length / width where width has been provided.The only thing the developer has to do, in my example, is provide the where clause, i.e.where default_width is nullAt the moment, I use a tag on the indexes to do this, but this could just as well be a field on the index-table/screen.
Currently when setting up a task or subroutine within the Software Factor the checkbox Atomic Transaction is set to false by default. It be better if the default is set to true instead of false. Normally all tasks and subroutine (procedures) will have to be set up using an atomic transaction. In some exceptions you would like to disable this feature.
Hi all,In order to synchronize data from a local MS SQL database to a MS Azure database, Microsoft offers a tool named the “SQL Data Synch”. In order to use this tool, a table cannot be using a user defined datatype. By default the Software Factory generates tables in MS SQL Server based on user defined types. You need to be able to disable this and instead use system datatypes when deploying.Therefor I would like to be able to configure this within a project version. And I would like to specify whether this is done for tables and or stored procedures. In some cases you would like to enable this for tables, but not for stored procedures.Currently you can set this by manually setting the column “alias_allowed” in the table dttp to 1 and after that alter the column user_defined_dttp on the table dom. This should be something that you can configure within the project version.Do keep in mind that you should still be able to deploy the user defined datatypes so that they can be used in SQL code templates. If you change to alias_allowed column that will also cause the user defined datatypes not to be generated within the upgrade/db create code groups. You should still be able to deploy the user defined datatypes in those script.
Of course we’re all very aware of the possible pitfalls when deploying a new version of our application. It does happen that we run a deploy with one cup of coffee to little and miss something.The [sf_product_info] table contains a lot of usefull information about what has been deployed, but missing in there is what previous version the deployment was based on. We recently had an issue on a non production enviroment that we had a difficult time to diagnose and even more difficult to repair. The root cause was that the environment went from version 2.55.7 to 2.55.16 but the .16 reployment was based on the .9 version. Would it be possible to add a sf_project_vrs_previous column to the sf_product_info table? That way we can check for constancy when deploying new versions.
For each projectversion, authorising new objects remains a hassle. Sometimes, you, as a programmer, immediately sets appropriate authorisation to roles when adding new functionality, Sometimes others add things or things get lost while handeling all kinds of new functionality… All in all, after weeks or months of building stuff, the day arrives when you go from test to acceptation or production… To get an idea if everything new has been, at least, reviewed for authorisation related stuff, it would help to see you or someone else has already taken a look at the new object. Also, when a new table is authorisised with a task in the SF, all fields could also be marked, which can reduce the number of new, unauthorised, new objects quite a bit. A pre-filter in the screen below, default ON, to sift out already “handled” new object is also much appreciated. Something like this, or by using a conditional format:
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.