Hey all,

So, I'm beginning to work through our 7.x code to correct all the -INCLUDEs and drill down syntax.

The following is a multiple drill down both how it is in 7.x and then my attempt to write it in 8.x syntax. Did I get it right? Can I optimize it any? Does each param need to be on its own line, or can I tack them all onto the same line? Can I place the TARGET='_blank', up top once before all the drillmenuitems, or must I repeat myself for each drillmenuitem? I tried to look up syntax differences from IBI's online docs, but they fail to deliver because all they give you is GUI methods to do drill downs. I wish there was real documentation for WebFOCUS, that is strictly code-based, and not anything to do with the GUI tools...

Our 7.x code for the drill:

TYPE=DATA,                   
     COLUMN=PFSLOADID,
     WHEN=LOCKED EQ 'Y',
     BACKCOLOR=RGB(200 150 150),
     TARGET='_blank',
     DRILLMENUITEM='Assign Bulkhead',
     URL=http://.../AdjustBulkhead.aspx?(LoadNumber=PFSLOADID),
     DRILLMENUITEM='Load Map',
     URL=http://.../LoadDetail.aspx?(SearchType='' Warehouse=1 LoadNumber=PFSLOADID),
     DRILLMENUITEM='Assign Loads',
     URL=http://.../AssignLoads.aspx?(Warehouse=1),
     DRILLMENUITEM='Add Comments',
     URL=http://.../LoadDetail.aspx?(SearchType='Admin' Warehouse=1 LoadNumber=PFSLOADID),
$

My 8.x code for the same drill:

TYPE=DATA,
     COLUMN=PFSLOADID,
     WHEN=LOCKED EQ 'Y',
     BACKCOLOR=RGB(200 150 150),
     DRILLMENUITEM='Assign Bulkhead',
          URL=http://.../AdjustBulkhead.aspx?( \
	 LoadNumber=PFSLOADID \
	 ),
	      TARGET='_blank',
     DRILLMENUITEM='Load Map',
          URL=http://.../LoadDetail.aspx?( \ 
	 SearchType='' \
	 Warehouse=1 \
	 LoadNumber=PFSLOADID \
	 ),
	      TARGET='_blank',
     DRILLMENUITEM='Assign Loads',
          URL=http://.../AssignLoads.aspx?( \
	 Warehouse=1 \
	 ),
	      TARGET='_blank',
     DRILLMENUITEM='Add Comments',
          URL=http://.../LoadDetail.aspx?( \
	 SearchType='Admin' \
	 Warehouse=1 \
	 LoadNumber=PFSLOADID \
	 ),
	      TARGET='_blank',
$

Any insights/suggestions will be welcome.

Thanks in advance!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: CoolGuy,

There is no difference between these two versions of the code - your "8.x" version is syntactically correct for WF 7.* (and the other way around). I assume the ... contains your URL path which you chose not to show here.

Is there an issue with your drilldowns?

Francis,

So you are saying that we don't have to modify our 7.x drill down code? Both versions of our code should work in either release?

Yes, I chose not to show the guts of the URLs, so I just replaced them with ...

No issue. Just need to make the existing 7.6 code work in our 8.x environment. I thought we needed to change our drill down code. Is that not the case?

Yes, you do not have to modify the drilldowns.

Post migration, drilldowns to new fexes (ones that were not migrated using the Migration Utility) require the full path.

In this linked article:
http://documentation.informati...c/source/topic82.htm

I found a part that expressed that there are syntax changes between 7.x and 8.x that would cause code not to work possibly in regards to both -INCLUDEs and drill-downs:

quote:

Retain Handles. This option is necessary when the Version 8.x source environment is migrated from a 7.x version of WebFOCUS, and this content is used in a Change Management process. During migration from Version 7.x to Version 8.x, the 7.x version hrefs are used as the 8.x version handles to allow the earlier code for –INCLUDEs and drill downs to continue to work with the Version 7.7.x style syntax. Moving these handles to the target environment, will allow code that contained the earlier style –INCLUDE and drill down syntax to continue to work.

Thus, why I thought I needed to switch out my code with what drilldown syntax differences I've noticed when creating a test 8.x report that has multiple drills, to what we had in 7.x.

So, if I'm copying app directories from the Reporting Server (RS) on 7.x and pasting them into our 8.x RS directory; then copying them from there to new Content folders I've created for them, I do not have to modify any drill downs unless I'm pointing my drill downs to new 8.x fexes?

What about INCLUDEs? Is it the same for them? Do I need to modify my INCLUDEs? Or only if we try to switch out what it's pointing to to a new .fex or URL (updated/new)?

Where did you get your information? Is there documentation that I'm missing that details what breaks and what doesn't and why?

The migration utilities from what I gathered are only available for Managed Reporting, BIDashs, and ReportCaster content. Is there a utility for RS content?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: CoolGuy,

The handles were created by the Migration Utility so that no code changes would be necessary. Without the handles, the full path to fexes is required. In your case, you're pointing to a URL, which doesn't have a handle...

Too many things going on at the same time!

1) The drilldown code you posted points to asp URLs, for which there are no handles.
2) For MRE content migrated using the Migration Utility, code changes to the drilldowns are NOT required because there are handles.
3) For drilldowns to fexes located in reporting server application folders, code changes to the drilldowns are NOT required (handles for these fexes do not exist and are not required)
4) If you plan to move fexes located in reporting server application folders into the Repository, you WILL need to modify the drilldowns and INCLUDEs (FULL PATH REQUIRED), because handles do not exist and are not created for content added to the Repository after the Migration Utility migrated the MRE content.

As clear as mud?

Sorry Francis. Just want to make sure I'm clear as to what my scenario is and what I'm looking for.

So, if I get this right:
- My URL drill targets aren't in need of changes because they don't have handles.
- For Managed Reporting (MRE?) content migrated using the MR utility, no code changes needed due to handles.
- For RS-based drilldowns, there would be no code changes needed because handles aren't required in the RS area.
- Code changes ARE needed for content moved from the RS to Content if it is MRE content migrated previously through the MR utility. What if it isn't MRE content? If it is strictly RS content moved from an old 7.x RS to a new 8.x RS? Are changes needed then?

Goofy question: What is a handle? I know it's something that removes the need to have a full path, but am unsure what exactly it means.

So, ultimately, I have plain-Jane Reporting Server app folders with plain-Jane content in 7.6 that I've copied over into our similar 8.1 RS apps directory. I then move this non-special content into the Content folders I've created for it, after which deleting what was copied over in the RS directory because it's now organized and present within Content.

After what you've described to me in regards to needed/unneeded changes, the code (for drilldowns) does not need changing save if it is MRE content?

I really really appreciate your help and patience with me as I try to learn this from you and others.

Because you're copying reporting server files into the Repository they become MRE content, with all the peculiarities - -INCLUDE statements require full paths, the sometimes need to use -MRNOEDIT, etc, etc. May I ask why are you moving these files from the Reporting Server to the Repository? It might make good business sense, but will only cause major headaches for the migration.

As far as I know, the handles are references to the Repository files and are stored in some Repository table.

After our migration was complete, tested and in production, I SLOWLY started converting -INCLUDE statements to use full paths (which I prefer by the way). I also use full paths in -HTMLFORM file-name.htm statements.

One problem I noticed with the Migration Utility is that if you reference a .sty WebFOCUS Stylesheet that is located in a different domain that the fex doing the referencing, the (existing or not) handle is not used and the stylesheet is not found, causing an error. For these fexes, I needed to provide the full path to the stylesheet:

INCLUDE = IBFS:/WFC/Repository/Common/accordion_rpt.sty, $

I think they overlooked the INCLUDE stylesheet (which is not the same as -INCLUDE).

We are wanting to move the content from the RS to Content due to wanting to be able to harness the new 8.x admin and security features in 8.x for our portals and content. You can hide/show files and directories in Content, as well as use the new group assignments for portal access under Security and Admin, etc.

Thanks for trying to explain the handles.

So, when you migrated, your content was already MR content, and you were able to use the MR migration utility. This way you had working content right off the bat, and then could slowly fix links as time permitted. Sounds nice!

Our content isn't MR content, so:
- we would either have to place it in MR in our 7.x environment and then migrate it over with the utility (is that a lot of reworking of code?);
- or just do as I've done and bring it over from the 7.x RS apps directory to the new 8.x RS apps directory before moving it into Content.
- or do the same as just described but not put it in Content just yet so we can have everything working still, but migrated/moved over from the old RS to the new one. If I just copy it over from the old apps to the new apps directory it should all still work, like your were saying, right?

Thanks for the insight on the INCLUDE .sty. Will make note of that.

What would you suggest we do to get our 7.6 content in our RS apps directories over to a new 8.1 Content repo? Would it be easier to place it all in MR on 7.6 first? Does that route require code changes too?

Again, thank you for your time and help Francis! You are the best!

So, where is your content now Francis? Is it not in Content? Or is it in the RS ibi\apps folders? I see you're on 8 like me. So, your content was initially in MR in 7.x, so you were able to use the utility right? If the content isn't in MR initially then we're up a creek, right?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: CoolGuy,

Our MRE content was moved to the Repository. This is where most of our reports are located. All the -INCLUDE and INCLUDE stylesheet and -HTMLFORM worked, because of the handles.

We have a few other reports in reporting server application folders. We have many snippets of code that are fexes in a "common" reporting server application folder, these are -INCLUDEd in the Repository fexes. Normally these would be -MRNOEDIT -INCLUDE appFolder/fexNAME.fex. I have been slowly changing my Repository fexes to use -INCLUDE IBFS:/EDA/EDASERVE/appFolder/fexNAME.fex instead.

Yes, the Repository provides all the security features (and more than you can handle let me tell you!). You definitely don't need the Migration Utility for your migration, because if you only have reporting server files, they don't get migrated with this utility (though I don't know if the utility does migrate B.I. Dashboard content).
If you're planning to deploy your reporting server files to the Repository, every single -INCLUDE and INCLUDE stylesheet and -HTMLFORM will have to be modified to include the full path, because the handles don't exist. You will have a heck of a time with HTML pages if they were designed using HTML Composer and use external fexes to load controls. All of this would need to be done in WF 7.* if you're moving stuff to MRE. In WF 7.* there is no notion of full path, but the -INCLUDE statement still needs to be modified...

Will someone else please put a word in? I'm exhausted

quote:

Originally posted by Francis Mariani:
Will someone else please put a word in? I'm exhausted

I'd help out, but I don't know anything about WF8.

Have you recovered yet?

quote:

I don't know anything about WF8

Lucky man - let's drink to that!

quote:

Lucky man - let's drink to that!

Me thinks you are missing the point. My customers are finding it so easy and intuitive that they haven't had to ask me any questions up to now.

Francis,

Thank you so much for helping me out so much today with your understanding and experience. I don't expect you to keep helping. You've put more than your fair share into this thread, and do with all threads. Again, I really appreciate you.

That last big post of yours really spelled it out for me. Thank you for that.

So, you taught me that once you stick 7.x RS content into the Content repo of a WF8 environment, it is considered MR content, and needs all the above mentioned changes to links so full paths are given due to missing handles since the content was originally not MR content. It finally all makes sense.

Sadly, we'll have to do a lot of modifying of code. Luckily we now know the what exactly we need to modify and why.

I really appreciate your help Francis! They need a way for forum members to reward each other like stackoverflow has more or less. I'd give you loads of upvotes and points where possible!

Despite my obvious lack of knowledge in the migration space with WF8, I do know quite a bit in other areas concerning and while working with WF8. So, if ever I can help you in return, I will without thinking twice.

Appreciate ya!

quote:

So, if ever I can help you in return, I will without thinking twice.

There in lies the true spirit of the Forum

T