We appreciate you taking the time to vote and add your suggestions to make our products awesome! Your request will be submitted to the community for review and inclusion into the backlog.

We recommend reviewing what is submitted before posting, in case your idea has already been submitted by another community member. If it has been submitted, vote for that existing feature request (by clicking the up arrow) to increase its opportunity of being added to Cireson solutions.

For more information around feature requests in the Cireson Community click here.

WorkItem Search of Action Log Comments

Many times there is valuable information within the Action Log Comments of workitems, it would be great to have the ability to perform a search of those comments returning a result set of workitems.
47 votes

Submitted · Last Updated

Comments

  • Chris_KeanderChris_Keander Customer Advanced IT Monkey ✭✭✭
    Came here to post this.  Here, have an upvote!
  • Amarjit_DhillonAmarjit_Dhillon Customer Adept IT Monkey ✭✭
    I am all in favour for this, upvosted.
  • Adrian_MataiszAdrian_Mataisz Customer Advanced IT Monkey ✭✭✭
    We should have a master search option that searches on every WI created and it does it for title, description, comments,Results Notes, MA notes, etc.
  • Wendy_CraigWendy_Craig Customer IT Monkey ✭
    Just resurrecting this one, if possible. It has 34 upvotes, but no response from Cireson. This is probably the most frequent request we get from our analysts. They feel that their detailed documentation of resolutions goes into a black hole where no one can ever find it again or reuse it.
  • Amarjit_DhillonAmarjit_Dhillon Customer Adept IT Monkey ✭✭
    I agree, the same goes for our Analysts as well and now they have stopped documenting. I have to say that the search facility in SCSM/Cireson is terrible. You cannot even search for the affected user.
  • Wendy_CraigWendy_Craig Customer IT Monkey ✭
    You can search for the affected user IF you limit the work item type. Since MAs and RAs don't have affected users, you can't find them for those work items. It took us quite a while to realize that any time we search, we should immediately remove the default and then add just the sections we want. I think the search and reporting features are the weakest part of the portal, and the area we get the most complaints about.
  • Tom_HendricksTom_Hendricks Customer Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    I agree, the same goes for our Analysts as well and now they have stopped documenting. I have to say that the search facility in SCSM/Cireson is terrible. You cannot even search for the affected user.
    Unfortunately, I must agree.  Lack of ad-hoc search is the #1 pain point for my users, orders of magnitude more than anything else that might be on their list.  @Wendy_Craig is correct that affected users can be searched for if you stop searching by work item and instead search by a more specific class (IR or SR), but there are plenty of other fields you cannot search on, and you cannot search on related objects.

    Users do not care about any of this, of course.  They just wonder why they cannot construct any kind of useful search, let alone why it is not easier.
  • Conner_WoodConner_Wood Customer Advanced IT Monkey ✭✭✭
    edited September 2017
    @Tom_Hendricks you remind me of a younger version of myself, full of hope....
    Sadly it's not the first time the subject of a better search has been brought to Cireson.

    I personally don't believe Community Votes have an impact large enough to prioritize rebuilding the hardcoded search logic into the search engine it could be.  I've tried to make my SCSM CopyCat program known to Cireson, to show it could be done, selecting a class and being able to search all the properties and relationships that the class has access to (this includes custom extensions as well as parent classes).  The download includes the source code, not much guesswork needed when you have a working example.  But it seems #UlteriorMotive  didn't work like I hoped it would.

    The tricky part about making a comment searcher in particular is that it would need to be made in particular.  At least, to make the user experience tolerable.  It wouldn't hurt to brainstorm it out either, so we know exactly what we're asking for and Cireson could better guesstimate how long it would take for new, 100% working functionality.

    In this case, I'm going to envision it, let my coherent extrapolated volition take form!
    1. User wants to search for troubleshooting comments that contain the phrase Wubba Lubba Dub Dub
    2. User goes to the main search page and removes the filthy default section.
    3. User clicks the "Add Work Item Type Section To Search By" combobox and select the special option called "Comments", and then clicks Add Section
    4. A glorious new "Search Comments By" section appears.
    5. There are properties listed as usual but there's also a special Filter Property!
    6. It allows choosing the ticket to search for
    • Incident
    • Change Request
    • Service Request
    • Problem
  • And the best part is, this will search all the comment types for a ticket, so no need to specify the comment class (CommentLog, AnalystCommentLog, UserCommentLog)
  • Note:  It was a design choice to not allow choosing the comment class, and just asking for a ticket filter, if no filter chosen, then search them all.

    The Comment Properties that can be chained:  
    EnteredBy
    Comment
    EnteredDate


    At this point the User is able to choose Incidents for the Ticket Filter, then set criteria of [Comment] [Contains] [Wubba Lubba Dub Dub]

    They hit search, and low and behold they receive back a list of rows that contain a comment with the Ticket ID it belongs to, as well as EnteredBy and EnteredDate.  Searching Comments everyone, Searching Comments, yeeeeaaaaaaahhhhhh!!!!

    The User can then click on the comment rows and it'll bring them to the ticket, like an actual search!