pabely ✭✭✭✭✭

I wouldn't spend too much of your time on this, you should be running 12.8.3+HF3 or 12.8.4 now.

Correct, I have raised a Feature Request, thanks

:-)

This can take quite a while and I have been doing secure delete via Ticket bulk actions with 100 Tickets at a time, in SQL I first searched for all Tickets which were opened > 7 years ago and had a Ticket Status of deleted. Updated those Tickets to have a Status of Closed and then set the Date Overide Integer = 1 and a due…

I know this was a good answer but is it possible to push this out a little more when you need multiple validate End User names added which might be for a server share for example? The list of users will not be limited and will expand as required. Here is an example :

Or just wait for the WHD12.8.4 release which is due soon now.

I believe OAUTH on SMTP should be fixed in upcoming 12.8.4 release.

We had this at a customer, as a workaround we forced an OOO for say 30 mins at 11PM when it would not matter and since then it has been Ok.

@"govitallen" Do you know if tenable is just reading the version.txt file and thus an easy edit to stop tenable flagging this up?

I created Advanced Ticket Searches that select all Tickets which are not Closed or Cancelled along with Request Types which are part of the Tech Group and save as a search for each Tech Group. The Techs can then recall these via the Query drop-downs.

You can't I'm afraid.

Nothing to do with this, total waste of time. WHD application issue.

If you are going for an external PostgreSQL Database then that will free you from WHD constraints, not sure a Docker is the way to go through as it adds more unnecessary complexity, and if there are problems on the database side, good luck!

I have customer running with Centos Stream9 OK. I believe more up to date Linux flavours are being looked at next year to be supported. I think the biggest issue is the database type if you are using the internal Postgres 13 type.

We have seen that! Can't wait for 12.8.4 !!

Only by using specific saved Advanced Ticket Search queries and recalling them via Ticket Filter. 

I cannot even get that far, it errors straight away as soon as you select the Solarwinds Integration option in WHD :-(

I would log with Support as they are likely to want Debug Logs.

No, same way if they send an E-mail without a subject it quite happily arrives Ok.

I would know how the inner workings of WHD are coded, but I have seen similar for things like Locations, adding new ones do not appear in dropdowns immediately, if you can't wait, logout then in again which must force a re-read from the database.

Hi @"admin_solarwindsBMH" Did you get this resolved?

Browser cache is not your friend here

Just tried a CC & BCC and works fine for me. Do you have sufficient "Scheduled E-Mail Delivery Threshold" configured within Setup > E-Mail > Options? Also are you copying back a bespoke wrapper_template.conf from {webhelpdesk}/bin/wrapper/conf each upgrade so losing the entry:…

My Support Ticket is #01787872 and I have a growing list of customers reporting this issue now.

I also have a similar situation on an Outbound Closure E-Mail being sent to a third party "How well did we do" system which contains a complex URL which used to work :-(

Are they Tech Group Managers, I think there was an issue where being a Tech Group Manager (but not a member of a Level) still gave you visibility. I today have seen this and had to add them as Level 1 member so they can again see the Tickets.

I have that quite frequently, First-line support seems to be robots and don't bother to check their own Serv-U links or you get a template back for the detail you have already submitted yet the template is clearly for an Orion product and nothing to do with WHD!

This is strange, you would think they would always go higher. Should it not the display the version within Setup > General > System Information not show Build #12.8.3.2230-HF3 i.e. show HF3 just like it did for HF2 (12.8.3.2944-HF2).?

I would agree, ALL Request Types should exist in at least one Tech Group.

I have that reported as well at one site, I am waiting for clarification of Tech Permission Group membership and whether 'Limit to Assigned Tech Groups' is in use.