It's all about the answers!

Ask a question

Are there limitation in 'Synchronize Attribute' ?

Virginia Brown (9333941) | asked Oct 22 '12, 8:26 p.m.
One of my 3.x customers has reported that 'Synchronize Attribute' works on 
only 1000 work items at a time.
Is this a known limitation or is this perhaps tied to a tunable of some sort?

Accepted answer

permanent link
Ralph Schoon (63.2k33646) | answered Oct 23 '12, 4:02 a.m.
Hi Virginia,

The CCM server has an advanced attribute that limits the result set returned by queries to a certain threshold. This is limiting the synchronize attributes. Not the synchronize attributes itself.

You could overcome the limit using a query and using the API. Or you change the limits in the server for the operation.
Virginia Brown selected this answer as the correct answer

Virginia Brown commented Oct 23 '12, 8:45 a.m.
Thanks Richard. 

all - here's the attribute to change if you want to go the server route
From ~ccm/admin page, Advanced Properties:
Max Query Result Set Size (default is 1000)

To convince ourselves of the process,we set query size
to 10 in the test environment and restarted the services.
Query results 'Showing 10 of 50' and indeed only the first
10 items are synchronized.

One other answer

permanent link
Nate Decker (37814461) | answered Sep 23 '14, 9:46 a.m.
edited Sep 23 '14, 9:49 a.m.

Ralph, are you saying you can use the API to synchronize work item attributes. I need to do that right now and am scouring the forums for information. Can you provide a reference to this method?

Edit: I'm primarily interested in an OSLC API solution.

Ralph Schoon commented Sep 23 '14, 9:54 a.m.
This is Java API. I don't know about OSLC/REST. I would assume you would basically have to post the resource including the missing attributes in OSLC.

Nate Decker commented Sep 23 '14, 9:58 a.m.

Thanks for the link to the Java API example. It looks like I will probably have to go that route (even though the rest of my application is written in VB.Net using the OSLC API).

I tried assigning an attribute value that did not yet exist using the OSLC API this morning and although the request did not produce an error on the server, it also didn't set and add the attribute in the work item. The parameter corresponding to the non-existent attribute was evidently just ignored. I had hoped it worked more like a CSV import where attributes that are not yet present are added. Perhaps I'll request an enhancement for this. It seems like it would be a valuable feature.

Ralph Schoon commented Sep 23 '14, 10:06 a.m.

You are aware that you can also synchronize the attributes in the process configuration UI, once you added a new attribute, are you?

I think nowadays that should work. I think there where issues in the past and I was interested in the expressions so I chose the example back then.

Nate Decker commented Sep 23 '14, 10:14 a.m.

Yes, we typically do this from the process configuration UI, but in this month's release we are changing about 6 or 7 work items that will all need re-synchronization and we have over 30 project areas on one network alone. We have two other networks that are less-utilized, but which would also require similar procedures.

I don't think it's a scalable approach to keep doing synchronizations for each project area. In this month's release, we are looking at potentially over 200 synchronize actions with overhead in between each one, particularly when we need to switch to the next project area. You can see how this would begin to get time-consuming and tedious. We are handling the rest of the Work Item changes using the OSLC API and that will allow us to address all Work Items across all project areas in one fell swoop. I'm sure you can see why we would like the similar ability for the synchronization action as well.

Ralph Schoon commented Sep 23 '14, 10:26 a.m.

Agreed. I see two approaches.

  1.  File a new question that expresses you want to do it in OSLC and why and if there is a way.
  2. Try an enhancement request with support.

I see why this would be needed. I am not sure if this is in the server or client. It is definitely something one wants to have in your situation.

I think this is a clash of how RTC was meant to be administered - basically by the team and how it is administered in big deployments - by a central team.

Your answer

Register or to post your answer.

Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.