Recently active topics

We upgraded to 16.3.1 and are now looking at the new Admin Centre.It is great that it is now accessible via the MDM webapp and has a great look. It also has great new features like the Server Dashboard and the Runtime Parameters.However, the Orchestration holds all the functionalities the business users regularly use. Basically everything under ‘Workflows’.This section is now further removed and looks very awkward. Especially in comparison to the slick new look of the rest. It is therefore harder to use which is not a great comfort. Given there are quite important commands that shouldn’t be done wrongly.Will you be looking to improve the look and usability and move it back to a more prominent location?

Hi everyone,I’ve seen several posts about extracting data‑quality metadata from Ataccama ONE for Monitoring projects, using approaches like GraphQL or Metadata Reader steps. I wanted to ask if anyone has been successfully able to extract this metadata using either method.We’re running into significant challenges with both approaches:GraphQL: When drilling down to the table or data‑element level, the underlying query structure becomes extremely complex and difficult to interpret. It’s very time-consuming, and we haven’t been able to construct workable queries. Metadata Reader steps: This option requires joining multiple metadata streams, and the resulting plan becomes overly complicated.I’m trying to understand whether anyone has successfully built Data Quality dashboards by extracting metadata from Ataccama ONE, loading it into a database(Databricks), and connecting it to Power BI.If you’ve done this or have guidance, I would really appreciate connecting with you to discuss your approa

Hi,Can some help me with creating a post processing transformation plan that shows a different row for each DQ rule that has passed/failed on a particular field in the transformation plan in One Web UI. For Eg: I have 2 rules, a uniqueness check and a format check on the ID field. In the post processing output file, what’s the best way to see how I can split this for each rule and see the pass/fail metrics for each rule.Thanks

Hello,I am trying to export the information displayed in the “History” tab of Glossary / Business Terms in Ataccama ONE using the ONE Metadata Reader component.On the Business Term page in the UI, the History tab displays details such as:Version number Published on date/time Published by userIt also shows when a term was newly created or updated, including the timestamp and the name of the user who made the change, similar to an audit/history log.I would like to export this information together with my glossary/business term metadata.However, in the ONE Metadata Reader, I can only see the standard business term attributes, and I cannot find any entities or columns related to:history version history revisions published by published on audit informationI am therefore trying to understand where this information is stored and how it can be exported.Could you please clarify:Which entity/table/object stores the data displayed in the History tab? Is this history/version information accessible

Hello,I wanted some help in MDM around publishing of master data records while creation in mdm if they have data quality issues. So if I create a record in the master layer of mdm and if any of the records have data quality issue that record should not be allowed to be published.So in this record there are 2 data quality issues. But I am still able to publish the record. So how can I prevent that. If there are data quality issues that record should not be allowed to publish. How can I achieve that please help me.Thank you.

Hello, Ataccama Community.  I am hoping you can help me figure this out.  I am trying to create a timeliness check.  The objective would be to have a general DQ rule that accepts an update date and then allows the user to configure a minimum delay and a maximum delay.  The rule would find the number of days from today and the update date, then take the maximum of that value.  If the max of that delay is mroe than the maximum parameter set, then it should return a “MAJOR DELAY” indication.Here is my challenge.  It does not seem to work when I use the parameter.  It only works when I use a hard coded value for the “maximum delay” in the test.I am hoping someone can help me figure it out. 

I am trying another way to deal with my strange timeliness issue.  Does anyone know how to reference a parameter in an advanced expression setting a variable?  As you can see it does not like me just using the name of the parameter, although it lets me use the name of an attribute just fine.Any ideas? 

Hello,We have a use case to integrate Ataccama ONE DQ&C with STONEBRANCH scheduler tool. The STONEBRANCH scheduler job should be able to trigger a monitoring project in DQ&C to perform DQ Evaluation on a Catalog item and generate a success/failure flag upon completion. Looking for documentation/details on how this can be achieved.Thanks in advance,Arjundev

Hi!We need to see the same filters from Main Rule page to subpages such as “Detection” and “DQ Evaluation”. How to do that?

We’re on v16.3. Is it possible to have an MMM role which has: read metadata access run profiling jobs run lkp builder jobs run monitoring project jobs But without the ability for example to edit the contents? e.g. just run a lkp builder job but not be able to amend the configurations of the lkp, or run the monitoring project without ability to change anything.I tried looking at documentation, seems like for Monitoring Project, the levels of view metadata access and view data access doesn’t allow running the project, while full access can. However full access also gives editing rights to monitoring projects which we don’t want to allow.Has anyone else run into the same scenario? How have you solved it?

We are working to migrate a long running set of data quality rules into Ataccama.  Most have been easily implemented and are running smoothly.However, the last set of about 10 deals with overlapping date ranges related to effective dates.  We want to validate that one Processor (for instance) only has one “active” record for a date (as defined by the start effective date and end effective dates on those records).For instance, let’s say Processor ABC has the following records, there is a problem with records 2 and 3.ABC, Start: 1/1/2024, End: 12/31/2024 ABC, Start: 1/1/2025, End: 12/31/2025 ABC, Start: 10/1/2025, End: 12/31/2026Ideally, we would like to pass an identifier (in this case ABC), and then the start effective date, and then the end effective date, as we have to do this on about ten + tables.  So, we’d like a universal rule that we can use across the board.I’m reaching out to see if anyone else has implemented a similar rule and can share with us their logic and process.

Hi,I need to dynamically union all sheets in an Excel file used as input for a plan. Since the number and names of sheets may change, I’m exploring whether this can be handled within Ataccama—potentially by using a Python script in a Run Shell Script step within a separate workflow, and then using the output as the plan input.I would appreciate your help.

Hi everyone,I’m working with Ataccama ONE version 15.4.1 and would like to track user activity for reporting purposes (e.g., number of users logging in or using the platform on a weekly ,monthly and quarterly  basis).Is it possible to capture this kind of user activity and export it into a SQL database for reporting?If yes, could you please outline:What needs to be configured to enable user activity tracking How to capture login/usage data How to export or make this data available in a SQL database Any recommended approach for building weekly/monthly user metrics Secondly : I want to create an export plan using a post-processing plan in the IDE. Is it possible to make the export rule-based, instead of exporting the entire set of invalid samples?For example: If a rule checks for missing values, can the export return only the invalid samples for that specific rule? Or  Is it possible to export invalid samples by attribute, so that if the attribute is Last Name, the export includes only

Hello, I'm working on a MDM project and need help with workflow-governed record creation via the REST API.I have an integration where record creation requests come in from a third party application with the required record details.I pick up those details and use them to create a new master record in MDM via POST /api/rest/master/{viewName}/{typeName}Currently the record gets created and published immediately, completely bypassing the workflow.What I actually need is for this record creation to go through the workflow, meaning it should create a task in draft state with the actual record details, and then go through the configured approval workflow steps before being published.Is there a way to achieve this via the REST API? Any workarounds or approaches others have used for this would be really helpful.