Numbering of IDs for workspace entities

[vaidehisekar]

Numbering of IDs of the entities in a workspace are not in sequence and in random order, we want to check if there is any way to start the numbering of IDs individually for each workspace.Please check this and let us know how the ID increment actually works in Octane and is there any settings to create it in sequence.

[GovernorT]

You beat me to adding this idea as well.  From my limited experience each project follows the same numbering sequence which muddies up the water when tracking.  I too would appreciate each Octane instance and project to have it's on concurrent numbering for artifact ID's.

[Pattye Bee]

I inquired about this issue in the past and was told the ID sequence numbers are generated in Octane as follows .

1. Octane Server Bounce

• Every time we bounce/reboot the Octane server, the sequence numbers for all entities jump to the next 1000.
• So, if the last user added to Octane was ID 5009, and we bounce Octane, the next user added will get ID 6001.

2. Number of Server Nodes

• Each application server node in the cluster gets its own unique group of 1000 ID’s for each entity type. We have two application servers in Octane Production, so two nodes.
• The first node could be using the 3000’s for new users, and the second node could be using the 4000’s for new users.
• Each user that logs into Octane could be connecting to either application server. It’s load balanced.
• If you log in today, get connected to the second node, and add a new user, the ID could be 4006. If you log in again tomorrow, get connected to the first node, and add a new user, the ID could be 3008.

Those are the two elements that cause the strange ordering for all the ID’s in Octane.

I was told it would be best to just consider an ID as a unique identifier for an element, and focus on the Creation Date/Time for determining chronological order... but I completely agree that it would be nice to have the ID's generated in sequential order.

[Spiegel]

The ID is unique across the entire shared space as part of the base architecture and there are no plans or even feasible ways to change it.

[Jeyasingh]

it is mandatory to have ID's generated in sequential order, otherwise how would teams what is missing, whether anyone deleted any entities.

[Spiegel]

Even if IDs were to be sequential, they cannot truly serve as evidence of deletion.

Backlog items can be converted from one type to another (e.g. Defect can be converted to a feature)

Moreover, each organization may consider different scopes of sequence (Defects apart from stories, Defects to together with stories, etc).

There are better means to track entity deletion. e.g. Issue a notification (email) upon deletion. Check the general audit log for deletions, and other means.