Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.
632 views

Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

David Gersic, you may remember this. You helped me create and configure
a null driver that does one of two things.
-> If a user object is created, it searches for a special object called
a 'person relationship object' and applies two attributes from that
object to the user object.
-> If a person relationship object is created, it searches for the
corresponding user object and applies those two attributes to the user.

It worked great at first, but now it appears to only work when the
person relationship object is created before the user object. In the
trace, I see the two attributes (OSUguestRole and OSUguestRoleDtl)
applied to the user object, but then they're 'filtered out'. I can't
figure out why. I have changed very little from the code that worked (I
added another rule to do some other account-management functions, but I
have since removed it so's not to muddy the water).

Here is the policy, which runs from the subscriber ETP:
https://pastebin.com/bzkDicK6

Here is the driver filter:
https://pastebin.com/mZ52XJXb

Here is a level 3 trace:
https://pastebin.com/2QajS3aB

Suggestions welcome.


Labels (1)
0 Likes
23 Replies
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

6423241;2493007 wrote:
David Gersic, you may remember this. You helped me create and configure
a null driver that does one of two things.
-> If a user object is created, it searches for a special object called
a 'person relationship object' and applies two attributes from that
object to the user object.
-> If a person relationship object is created, it searches for the
corresponding user object and applies those two attributes to the user.

It worked great at first, but now it appears to only work when the
person relationship object is created before the user object. In the
trace, I see the two attributes (OSUguestRole and OSUguestRoleDtl)
applied to the user object, but then they're 'filtered out'. I can't
figure out why. I have changed very little from the code that worked (I
added another rule to do some other account-management functions, but I
have since removed it so's not to muddy the water).

Here is the policy, which runs from the subscriber ETP:
https://pastebin.com/bzkDicK6

Here is the driver filter:
https://pastebin.com/mZ52XJXb

Here is a level 3 trace:
https://pastebin.com/2QajS3aB

Suggestions welcome.


So the User shows up (add), and there's a query:


<query class-name="OSUpersonRelationship" scope="subtree">
<search-class class-name="OSUpersonRelationship"/>
<search-attr attr-name="OSUidmId">
<value timestamp="1546006818#18" type="string">IDM802220822</value>
</search-attr>
<read-attr attr-name="OSUguestRole"/>
<read-attr attr-name="OSUguestRoleDtl"/>
</query>


which finds no OSUpersonRelationship object. If I recall correctly, that's ok.

A bit of time passes, then the OSUpersonRelationship object shows up (add):


<add cached-time="20181228142025.002Z" class-name="OSUpersonRelationship" event-id="PeopleSoft-JDBC#Publisher#40038058:26049edb-d920-4df4-86f2-e41dd51c90ff" qualified-src-dn="O=OSUMC\OU=PersonRelationship\CN=PS0000083952" src-dn="\ID1\OSUMC\PersonRelationship\PS0000083952" src-entry-id="218206" timestamp="1546006824#11">


There's a query, which finds one user:


<output>
<instance class-name="User" qualified-src-dn="O=OSUMC\OU=users\CN=wash54" src-dn="\ID1\OSUMC\users\wash54" src-entry-id="218205"/>
<status level="success"></status>
</output>


but then it does a trace message and stops here:


[12/28/18 09:20:25.083]:Null Driver ST: Action: do-trace-message("User DN to update is "+token-local-variable("userDN")).
[12/28/18 09:20:25.083]:Null Driver ST: arg-string("User DN to update is "+token-local-variable("userDN"))
[12/28/18 09:20:25.084]:Null Driver ST: token-text("User DN to update is ")
[12/28/18 09:20:25.084]:Null Driver ST: token-local-variable("userDN")
[12/28/18 09:20:25.084]:Null Driver ST: Token Value: "\ID1\OSUMC\users\wash54".
[12/28/18 09:20:25.084]:Null Driver ST: Arg Value: "User DN to update is \ID1\OSUMC\users\wash54".
[12/28/18 09:20:25.084]:Null Driver ST:User DN to update is \ID1\OSUMC\users\wash54
[12/28/18 09:20:25.084]:Null Driver ST:Policy returned:


So this policy doesn't do anything. It should.
0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

6423241;2493007 wrote:
David Gersic, you may remember this. You helped me create and configure
a null driver that does one of two things.
-> If a user object is created, it searches for a special object called
a 'person relationship object' and applies two attributes from that
object to the user object.
-> If a person relationship object is created, it searches for the
corresponding user object and applies those two attributes to the user.

It worked great at first, but now it appears to only work when the
person relationship object is created before the user object. In the
trace, I see the two attributes (OSUguestRole and OSUguestRoleDtl)
applied to the user object, but then they're 'filtered out'. I can't
figure out why. I have changed very little from the code that worked (I
added another rule to do some other account-management functions, but I
have since removed it so's not to muddy the water).

Here is the policy, which runs from the subscriber ETP:
https://pastebin.com/bzkDicK6

Here is the driver filter:
https://pastebin.com/mZ52XJXb

Here is a level 3 trace:
https://pastebin.com/2QajS3aB

Suggestions welcome.


Er, look here:


<do-set-src-attr-value disabled="true" name="OSUguestRole">


and here:


<do-set-src-attr-value disabled="true" name="OSUguestRoleDtl">


That "disabled=true" there ... that's going to affect what this rule does rather badly. You'll want to enable those, so that do something useful.
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

On 12/28/2018 15:24, dgersic wrote:
>
> 6423241;2493007 Wrote:
>> David Gersic, you may remember this. You helped me create and
>> configure
>> a null driver that does one of two things.
>> -> If a user object is created, it searches for a special object called
>> a 'person relationship object' and applies two attributes from that
>> object to the user object.
>> -> If a person relationship object is created, it searches for the
>> corresponding user object and applies those two attributes to the user.
>>
>> It worked great at first, but now it appears to only work when the
>> person relationship object is created before the user object. In the
>> trace, I see the two attributes (OSUguestRole and OSUguestRoleDtl)
>> applied to the user object, but then they're 'filtered out'. I can't
>> figure out why. I have changed very little from the code that worked (I
>> added another rule to do some other account-management functions, but I
>> have since removed it so's not to muddy the water).
>>
>> Here is the policy, which runs from the subscriber ETP:
>> https://pastebin.com/bzkDicK6
>>
>> Here is the driver filter:
>> https://pastebin.com/mZ52XJXb
>>
>> Here is a level 3 trace:
>> https://pastebin.com/2QajS3aB
>>
>> Suggestions welcome.

>
> Er, look here:
>
>
> Code:
> --------------------
>
> <do-set-src-attr-value disabled="true" name="OSUguestRole">
>
> --------------------
>
>
> and here:
>
>
> Code:
> --------------------
>
> <do-set-src-attr-value disabled="true" name="OSUguestRoleDtl">
>
> --------------------
>
>
> That "disabled=true" there ... that's going to affect what this rule
> does rather badly. You'll want to enable those, so that do something
> useful.
>
>


ARGH! How could I have overlooked that? (don't answer that).

Thanks


0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

On 12/28/2018 01:35 PM, 6423241 wrote:
>
> ARGH! How could I have overlooked that? (don't answer that).


To be as fair as possible to you, I have a love/loathe relationship with
the option to disable things. When useful, it's insanely useful, but I
really, REALLY wish there were some kind of nag about the existence of
disabled rules/conditions/actions, or that the changing of
enabled-to-disabled (in particular) required a confirmation of some kind.
It's not a big deal, and I might hate it once it behaved that way, but
right now it is too easy to accidentally click on those (maybe yours was
on purpose, though) and not realize it.

--
Good luck.

If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below.

If you want to send me a private message, please let me know in the
forum as I do not use the web interface often.
0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

ab;2493015 wrote:
On 12/28/2018 01:35 PM, 6423241 wrote:
>
> ARGH! How could I have overlooked that? (don't answer that).


To be as fair as possible to you, I have a love/loathe relationship with
the option to disable things. When useful, it's insanely useful, but I
really, REALLY wish there were some kind of nag about the existence of
disabled rules/conditions/actions, or that the changing of
enabled-to-disabled (in particular) required a confirmation of some kind.
It's not a big deal, and I might hate it once it behaved that way, but
right now it is too easy to accidentally click on those (maybe yours was
on purpose, though) and not realize it.

--
Good luck.

If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below.

If you want to send me a private message, please let me know in the
forum as I do not use the web interface often.


I know what you mean, but $DIETY no, please not yet another confirmation / are you sure? / are you really sure? pop up warning box. Yes, I'm sure, otherwise I wouldn't have done it.
0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

On 12/31/2018 07:56 AM, dgersic wrote:
>
> I know what you mean, but $DIETY no, please not yet another confirmation
> / are you sure? / are you really sure? pop up warning box. Yes, I'm
> sure, otherwise I wouldn't have done it.


Ultimately I agree with you, but only because my curmudgeonly side says
that if you didn't mean to push that code out, you should have looked
more-carefully when using Compare to push code out. That's all well and
good, as long as you understand what you are doing. That "Disable" option
is a couple pixels from the Trace (enable/disable) button, and while I use
neither of them often, I've clicked on both of them accidentally and only
noticed because, when comparing to push the code out, I saw something
unexpected in the XML.

Maybe the other option is better: when a driver config starts, and all
policies are loaded, print one line of notification for anything disabled
so, at least if looking, it's clear what is disabled from the start.

--
Good luck.

If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below.

If you want to send me a private message, please let me know in the
forum as I do not use the web interface often.
0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

ab;2493049 wrote:
On 12/31/2018 07:56 AM, dgersic wrote:
>
> I know what you mean, but $DIETY no, please not yet another confirmation
> / are you sure? / are you really sure? pop up warning box. Yes, I'm
> sure, otherwise I wouldn't have done it.


Ultimately I agree with you, but only because my curmudgeonly side says
that if you didn't mean to push that code out, you should have looked
more-carefully when using Compare to push code out. That's all well and
good, as long as you understand what you are doing. That "Disable" option
is a couple pixels from the Trace (enable/disable) button, and while I use
neither of them often, I've clicked on both of them accidentally and only
noticed because, when comparing to push the code out, I saw something
unexpected in the XML.

Maybe the other option is better: when a driver config starts, and all
policies are loaded, print one line of notification for anything disabled
so, at least if looking, it's clear what is disabled from the start.

--
Good luck.

If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below.

If you want to send me a private message, please let me know in the
forum as I do not use the web interface often.



I wouldn't mind seeing a startup trace message listing policies with disabled rules. I'm not sure that I'd actually use such a thing, but it wouldn't bother me to have it.
0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently


> I wouldn't mind seeing a startup trace message listing policies with
> disabled rules. I'm not sure that I'd actually use such a thing, but it
> wouldn't bother me to have it.


I am not sure. I like using Do-Trace, disabled to insert inline comments
in my policies. Would be annoying to see every single one of those
listed off each restart.


0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

On 01/01/2019 10:17 AM, Geoffrey Carman wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't mind seeing a startup trace message listing policies with
>> disabled rules. I'm not sure that I'd actually use such a thing, but it
>> wouldn't bother me to have it.

>
> I am not sure. I like using Do-Trace, disabled to insert inline comments
> in my policies. Would be annoying to see every single one of those listed
> off each restart.


Personally, that sounds like an abuse of tracing. If you really want it
there, but not really there, set it to a higher trace level than you'll
ever use, like 50, and you're done.

--
Good luck.

If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below.

If you want to send me a private message, please let me know in the
forum as I do not use the web interface often.
0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

On 1/1/2019 1:01 PM, ab wrote:
> On 01/01/2019 10:17 AM, Geoffrey Carman wrote:
>>
>>> I wouldn't mind seeing a startup trace message listing policies with
>>> disabled rules. I'm not sure that I'd actually use such a thing, but it
>>> wouldn't bother me to have it.

>>
>> I am not sure. I like using Do-Trace, disabled to insert inline comments
>> in my policies. Would be annoying to see every single one of those listed
>> off each restart.

>
> Personally, that sounds like an abuse of tracing. If you really want it
> there, but not really there, set it to a higher trace level than you'll
> ever use, like 50, and you're done.


That is not a bad idea. But clicking on no-trace button is faster than
typing a number. A good point.


0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Null Driver rule doesn't work consistently

On 01/01/2019 02:22 PM, Geoffrey Carman wrote:
> That is not a bad idea. But clicking on no-trace button is faster than
> typing a number. A good point.


I love you man, but you're insane. The default field, when creating a
trace, is the trace level field (as I recall), so just set it there from
the start.

--
Good luck.

If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below.

If you want to send me a private message, please let me know in the
forum as I do not use the web interface often.
0 Likes
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Micro Focus. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation. Certain versions of content ("Material") accessible here may contain branding from Hewlett-Packard Company (now HP Inc.) and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. As of September 1, 2017, the Material is now offered by Micro Focus, a separately owned and operated company. Any reference to the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks is historical in nature, and the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks are the property of their respective owners.