Verified Answers

If an answer to your question is correct, click on "Verify Answer" under the "More" button. The answer will now appear with a checkmark. Please be sure to always mark answers that resolve your issue as verified. Your fellow Community members will appreciate it!  Learn more

  • State Verified Answer
  • Replies replies
    10
  • Subscribers subscribers
    4
  • Views views
    738
  • Users 0 members are here
  • Locked Locked
Related
Options
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

emails gets marked as read and skipped other mapping in CIT scenario

Darshana Shetty
 

Hi,

Use Case: user sends an email to update Incident or Request mentioning module name in Subject: For eg:

"Request 12345" or "Incident 12345"

Now i have created scenario with 2 mappings, 1 for Incident and other for Request:

inside mapping at Entities level i have written below script:

Request:

and for Incident:

in source connector, i have mentioned "Flag e-mail messages as read" if it is successful, on failure "do not modify e-mail message from server":

Issue i am facing is: when i get mail, sometime it does not update ticket and gets marked as read. For example mail is "Incident 12345", it gets skipped at Request mapping and so gets marked as Read and Incident mapping never receives it.

If at source connector if i select "do not modify e-mail message from server" on Successful also, then mails will not get marked as read at all and will get called every time scenario will be run.

  • 0

    This is not my area of expertise, however, it seems clear to me, since you are not using a feedback loop the action is being applied right after fetching message, yet each email has to go through Request Mapping (regardless whether request or incident), then each email goes through Incident Mapping (again, regardless whether request or incident). The post-processing action does not make a distinction whether request or incident; it produces each record read, and since you are ignoring mapping (which probably should be document instead of node), there is no failure.

    Since I am no longer an expert with E-Mail connector; can you have multiple source documents (one for request-filtered by subject "Request" and one for incident-filtered by subject "Incident") or are you only allowed one source document? If you can only have one source document, then I would suggest either forcing an error (instead of ignoring) or combine both mappings into one and move your "entities" Mapping Scripts to each Request / Incident branch (using ignore node).

  • 0   in reply to 

    Hi Mark,

    Thank you for the reply. I tried combining both mappings into one. as request was at the top, mail was getting ignored and was getting marked as read. it was not going to Incident mapping. 

    i hope you are talking about this only.

  • 0 in reply to   

    So, do you have one source document or two?  I can only assume you have one source document.  Combining both mappings into one IS NOT like your last screenshot (where there is entitiesDst and entitiesDst1).

  • 0   in reply to 

    one. Same mailbox will be used for Incident and Request update,

  • 0 in reply to   

    Can you have two source documents?

  • 0   in reply to 

    you mean 2 source connector for same mailbox?

  • 0 in reply to   

    No, I mean one source connector with two produced documents.

    Put another way, does (or can) your source connector have InMailMessageSrc and InMailMessageScr1?

  • Verified Answer

    +1 in reply to 

    If you can only have one InMailMessageScr, then use one mapping box with one Source/Mapping - Destination mapping with the following logic...

  • 0   in reply to 

    Hi Mark,

    this one looks best. But how should i write script in request or incident? if i will write same script at Request level, then it would ignore complete mapping write? any idea you can give on script to tell continue with mapping

  • 0   in reply to 

    hey, your suggestion worked for me. thank you

Resources

Support
Documentation
Learning Services
Partner Programs
Privacy
Compliance
Help
Company
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use
Cookies Preferences
Accessibility
Anti-Slavery Statement
Support
Contact Us
Careers
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of OpenText. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use. Certain versions of content ("Material") accessible here may contain branding from Hewlett-Packard Company (now HP Inc.), Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, or Micro Focus. As of January 31, 2023, the Material is now offered by OpenText, a separately owned and operated company. Any reference to the HP, Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE, and Micro Focus marks is historical in nature and the HP, Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE, and Micro Focus marks are the property of their respective owners.