Peter_2022

I think this feature request can be closed. It is implemented in 12.8.

A variation of this was posted as a feature request in 2013 with over 100 votes: Multiple clients on one ticket. It was still considered Open in 2020.

I have floated this as a Feature Request with a bit more detail that I think captures the needs expressed in the other comments. Requested Oct 2022: Allow Clients to share tickets (multiple clients can review, track, update a ticket), e.g. a Client Team, or Client Project Manager. To elaborate more and keep it within the…

I'm just adding another comment to voice support for this. Far more interested in this feature than adding @notifcations.

Clients who are cc'd might be able to edit and update an individual ticket, but it doesn't help managers who are trying to keep tabs on multiple tickets submitted by multiple people.

We have a similar situation but more specifically, our Ticket_Custom_Field table is 70% NULL with only the Definition ID and Entity ID populated. This isn't a size issue for us but a performance one and I'm wondering if we can delete the NULL records from our closed tickets without consequence.

We make extensive use of Request Type (Problem Type in SQL) and Status to sort our tickets. Most of our reporting is SSRS/PowerBI based but I believe our techs use the Dashboard widgets (based on shared queries) for their monitoring. One recurring thing I have noticed is the presence of NULL in a lot of fields where one…

Closing the loop on this. The migration was very smooth from the application's perspective. Where we ran into minor hiccups is likely common to all database/application migrations. We use WHD slightly off-label and to assist in that, and our custom reporting, we have an agent that reads/writes/executes on various tables,…

You need to be an Administrator; Inactivate the Tech first, and then delete.

Are you asking if there is a downside to deleting Techs?

Have you already created the WHD database? (If not, I think you need to check the Create database box.)

It doesn't sound like this is your issue, but we used to run into the issue where Clients thought they couldn't add a note because we Custom Fields that were required on Request Sub-Types but not at ticket creation. * A client would create a ticket; * Action Rule route to a sub-request type with required fields. (Under…

Is this happening on every ticket, for every client? Each ticket can be customized for its email delivery options. If it is happening just to one client, are their client settings different? It could also be the global Ticket configuration:

I don't know if this was resolved or not, but we had difficulty troubleshooting when emails would send and when they would not. We eventually found that it is very dependent on the ticket and the settings under Receiptients. Not sure if this helps or not in this case.

Thank you, they are both 10 character text fields. We experience the same effect with a single-choice mixed with pop-up. (I have not heard it reported with multiple-choice.)

Yes, in the Advanced Ticket search they work well and as expected, both as personal queries or saved queries. Depending on the query, results range from small to large but all work fine in the Advanced search. And as long as the query requires one or less Custom Fields, it works on the dashboard. It's only when we require…

Thank you - much appreciated!

Thank you for the prompt reply and Correct; we rely on the Client to identify the scope of what is required. A single request may have multiple components but we have standardized our processes and are somewhat agnostic with regards to which individual Tech works a particular task, provided it is worked by the correct…

To close this out, the problem was the "authorizing" user was not the same as the email user. As described in the other comments, I suspect this was a case of during the process to setup and login as each of the Mailboxes there was one instance where it was overlooked to logout from the browser and therefore it had a…

Thank you

Is this still an issue in 12.7.10?

Hi Phil, no - all the accounts are dedicated Service Accounts. We have two instances of WHD (Prod and Test). Each instance has two email accounts to handle different ticket flows. The accounts are configured with OAuth and the email accounts exist as "clients" when syncing with LDAP. In Production we are not seeing this…

We're on 12.7.9 so I don't know if this applies to 12.7.7. The Outgoing is still "Basic" but Incoming can be configured with OAuth or Basic.

Our IT department was using WHD but we use our own instance of WHD "off-label" for purposes completely unrelated to IT management. We have a separate license, separate techs, etc. Within that, we have two books of business that are largely independent. We use Tech Groups and custom action rules to direct tickets where we…

We just went through this and there are a few "gotchas" if you aren't careful. Thank you to the other commentators for helping us on our way. This is being written out to be explicit about all the steps we had to go through and assumes you have read the "Configure an incoming e-email account" instructions. Our setup sounds…

Thank you; this has resolved the issue.

My dashboard issues seem to have resolved themselves and did not impact all users. We are having different WHD issues that are being worked, and I'm going to attribute this issue to that. Not very helpful, but the "Turn it off and turn it on again" solution seems to have worked.

I have the same question but in our situation it was the upgrade from 12.7.6 to 12.7.9. I have opened a support ticket. None of the existing dashboard graphs are loading and the Widget Drawer does not provide any options; unable to access existing queries. 

Sorry for what might be an ignorant question, will going to 12.7.5 (or beyond) resolve this issue?

Which version of WHD are you using?