I need a JQL filter that matches what's in the backlog, and have the same order as the backlog.
My product owner and I ordered all the backlog, and I need my filter to reflect that.
My current attempt has about five and a half times as many items as the backlog...900 vs 159 actual items in the backlog
project="Project Name" AND issuetype != Epic AND (Sprint is EMPTY OR Sprint not in (openSprints(), futureSprints())) and status != Closed Order by RANK
The order isn't correct either.
How do I filter items to match what the backlog has, and show the same order?
If you check the configuration of your board, it will have a few Filter settings that specify which issues have to be displayed on your board and backlog. Documentation is available here. The screen looks like this:
With the contents of the Saved Filter and Filter Query fields you should be able to build the JQL query that matches your backlog. The Ranking field specifies how issues are ordered, but typically this is done by their Rank, which you already use in your JQL. You can add ASC or DESC to change the direction of the order, ie. ORDER BY RANK DESC.
These rules determine which issues are visible in the backlog for your board:
An issue will only be visible in the Backlog if:
the issue is not a Sub-Task,
the issue matches the board's Saved Filter (see Configuring Filters),
the issue's status maps to one of the board's columns (but not the 'Done' column), and
there is at least a status being mapped to the right most column. Eg. If you have the columns To Do, In Progress , and Done, ensure that you have a status mapped to In Progress at least. If you map all the statuses to the first column (To Do), you will not be able to see any issues in the Backlog.
This is taken from this documentation page.
Here is the answer that worked for me
project = <your project> AND issuetype in (task, "Task ", Story, Improvement, Improvements, Research, Bug, Incident) AND status not in
(Done, CANCELLED, Closed) AND (Sprint in (futureSprints()) OR Sprint
is EMPTY) ORDER BY rank
Changed the parameters according to your project.
Order by rank - gives you the order you see in the backlog
Cheers
Related
I have two dynamic product groups
First: Test Product with variants
Conditions: Product Is equal to Variant product
Result total 7 like I expect this
Second: Active Products
Conditions: Active yes
we allready see that the stream ids are just set to 5 products
Now we get a total of 5 instead of 15 products like expected?
Why is it inconsistent, and how can I modify my request to consider also the variants?
You shouldn't rely on the stream_ids column as an indicator which product is shown in a dynamic product group at any given moment. This is because there are multiple more things that factor into whether a product is shown to a user in a dynamic product group.
The filters you define for the group resolve to an SQL query, which in simplified terms would yield something like WHERE active = 1 AND id IN ('...', '...'). So the stream_ids column isn't used to select the contents of a group, but the entire query including all filters is executed in the storefront request. The result of that query is what you see in the preview of the dynamic product group.
Why doesn't it correlate completely with the content of stream_ids?
Shopware features inheritance of fields. If fields of a variant haven't been assigned a value, they may inherit that value from their parents. This may not be reflected in the contents of stream_ids. In fact the children/variants may even inherit the contents of stream_ids.
Then there's the fact that contents of the product group may vary, depending on the current sales channel. That may be because the sales channel features a different language, hence the content of a translatable field used in a filter may vary. Also if you use price filters, there is the possibility of products with multiple prices, which might only be shown if certain conditions are met, defined by the rule builder.
In short, don't count on the stream_ids, which can't reflect all these variables but are used in some capacity internally, for invalidating caches and such. Instead use the preview to judge what the average user might find when they see a product group. There's also the possibility to choose which sales channel the preview should apply to, for the exact reason, that contents may differ depending on the sales channel.
I'm working with bus data where each record in the raw data records a bus reaching a stop and how many people got on or off the bus. The raw data also includes which route the bus is for every record, and by creating an ID of [bus route] + [bus stop], I can then reference a manually maintained stop order table so that the order for the stop in the context of the route is available for sorting. E.g order for stop100.route5 = 4; order for stop100.route6 = 8 , etc.
Example of the same stop having a different order here:
The separate table for stop order I mentioned is set up like this (filtered to show different values for the same stop):
Now that I'm trying out PowerBI I'm hitting a bit of a roadblock. I can't sort the stop column by the stop order column, as there are multiple values for each stop depending on the route in question. I know that I can still use stop order and stop as row values and toggle the 'expand all' setting, but my ideal is to hide the stop order numbers, plus in drill-down situations to stop level, the stops will be sorted alphabetically rather than by order number.
For any experts I have a few avenues I thought might be viable workarounds with enough know-how:
Is there a way to hide portions of a field's values in visuals? This whole thing wouldn't be an issue if I could use the stop.route IDs in place of the stop name field, but I would want to hide the .route portion of the value.
Is there any long-winded way to create a one-to-one sorting that I can use to sort the stop column? Some sort of dynamic calculation that filters a one-to-many to a one-to-one, as every context I plan on using this, there will be only one possible order # for the stop.
Many thank yous to anyone with advice!
I have a list of customers and their revenue. For certain reasons, I want to display one section per customer, for the TOP 10 customers (in regards to their revenues). Sounds simple.
However, when I activate the ranking for the sections, the customer with the 7th highest revenue is placed on the top of the list, and is given the running count '8'.
I tried everything I could think of to put them back into order, with no success. Any ideas?
I finally found a solution - the reason for this strange behaviour is the fact that section filters don't always seem to work.
Let me explain:
I had a filter on both the section and the table therein, limiting customers only to a certain subgroup thereof. The filter on the table worked, so that the displayed revenue represented the correct revenue I expected. However, the filter on the section did NOT work, so that the ranking took into consideration the entire revenue, and not only the subgroup's revenue. Therefore Customer 8 landed on first place, because in total, he had the highest revenue.
So if you have this problem, check your filters.
Next, I'll be trying to find out why the section filters don't apply...
Just a bit of background info:
I have dimension table which uses SCD2 to track user changes in our company (team changes, job title changes etc) See example below:
I've built an Analysis Services Cube and created all the necessary hierarchy's for the dimensions and it works well when navigating and drilling down through the fact table.
The problem I have is with the filters on the PerformancePoint dashboard. As I'm using the User Dimension table with it's multiple instances of users it's showing duplicates up in the list. I can understand why as the surrogate ID is being referenced on the Dimension. But if I choose the first instance of the A-team I will see all their sales for a particular period and if I choose the second instance I will see all their sales for a different period.
What is the best way to handle this type of behavior? Ideally I'd like to see a distinct list of teams in alphabetical order and when I choose the team name it shows all of their data over time.
I've considered using MDX query filters but I'd like to see if there's anything I haven't thought about.
I realise this isn't an easy and quick question but any help would be appreciated!
The answer was simple after having a trawl through my User Dimension table on the Cube.
Under my user dimension I added 2 duplicate attributes to my attributes list ("Team Filter" is a copy of "Team", "User Filter" a copy of "User Name") these will be used only for filtering the dashboard.
Under the attribute properties for each duplicate I then set AttributeHierarchyOptimizedState to "Not Optimized", I also set their AttributeHierarchyVisible to false as I'd shown the two duplicate attributes in the hierarchy window in the middle.
Deploy your Cube to the server and go in to PerformancePoint. Create a new MDX Filter (this image shows the finished filter)
This is the code I used, it only shows dimension members which have a fact against them (reduces the list a considerable amount) and by using allmembers at the dimension it also gives me the option to show "All" at the top of the list.
Deploy the new filters and now you can see the distinct list of users and teams, works perfectly and selects every instance (regardless of the SCD2 row)
Hi everyone I'm working on a school project, and for my project I chose to create an ecommerce system that can process recurring orders. This is for my final project, I'll be graduating in May with an associates in computer science.
Keep in mind this is no where a final solution and it's basically a jumping off point for this database design.
A little background on the business processes.
- Customer will order a product, and will specify during checkout whether it is a one time order or a weekly/monthly order.
- Customer will specify a location in which to pick up their order (this location is specific only to the order)
- If the value of the order > 25.00 then it is accepted otherwise it is rejected.
- This will populate the orders_test and order_products_test tables respectively
Person on the back end will have a report generated for deliveries for the day based on these two tables.
They will be able to print it off and it will generate a list of what items go to what location.
Based on the following criteria.
date_of_next_scheduled_delivery = current date
remaining_deliveries > 0
Once they are satisfied with the delivery list they will press "Process Deliveries" button.
This will adjust the order_products_test table as follows
Subtract 1 from remaining_deliveries
Insert current date into date_of_last_delivery_processed
Based on delivery_frequency (i.e. once, weekly, monthly) it will change the date_of_next_scheduled_delivery
status values in the order_products_test table can either be active, hold, or canceled, expired
I just would like some opinions if I am approaching this correctly or if I should scratch this approach and start over again.
A few thoughts, though not necessarily complete (there's a lot to your question, but hopefully these points help):
I don't think you need to keep track of remaining deliveries. You only have 2 options - a one time order, or a recurring order. In both cases, there's no sense in calculating remaining deliveries. It's never leveraged.
In terms of tracking the next delivery date, you can just keep track of the day of the order. If it's recurring -- monthly or weekly, regardless -- everything is calculable from that first date. Most DB systems (MySQL, SQL Server, Oracle, etc) support more than enough date computation flexibility so that you can calculate this on the fly, as opposed to maintaining such a known schedule.
If the delivery location is only specific to the order, I see no use in creating a separate table for it -- it's functionally dependent on the order, you should keep it in the same table as the order. For most e-commerce systems, this is not the case because they tend to associate a list of delivery locations with accounts, which they prompt you about when you order more than once (e.g., Amazon).
Given the above, I bet you can just get away with 2 of your 4 tables above -- Account and Order. But again, if delivery locations are associated with Accounts, I would indeed break that out. (but your question above doesn't suggest that)
Do not name your tables with a "_test" suffix -- it's confusing.