Skip to main content

I have a ‘provider_name’ cleansing component under ‘provider’ component. When I test the ‘provider_name’ cleansing component on DQS in a test plan, the values on pur* and out* fields look good. And the provider component shows the propertied of the name component as

 

but for some reason, none of my changes are reflected or seen when the component is deployed with changes and subject is reprocessed. Am I missing something? I did debug at the name level and the component level, the values come out right but not after being deployed and reprocessed. Any suggestions?

Hi @sgilla, it’s not clear from your message what exactly you deploy to the server - if it’s just a single component or all the related plans. Sometimes it happens that the mapping is not correctly applied in the server wrapper plan/component when you deploy just the inner component.  Would you please be able to share the full context - wrapper plan and components in here?

This context would help to identify the issue.

Thanks,

Ales


Hello Ales,

Deploying the whole bundle with the small change on a name cleansing component, which was not reflecting after the subject reprocess. The wrapper plan etc are intact no changes there. 

Solution I figured is to onramp the records as deleted and let omni mark them ‘INACTIVE’ on the source and instance tabled. Then re-inserting them as a new ‘INS’ record to the ramp. Thats the way the cleansing rules are seen applied.

So I am confused as to why a subject re-process did not help and neither did the record re-load (‘UPD’), instead only the solution above where I inactivate all records and re-activate is working. Is there a better solution than this where we do not go through these multiple steps of Inactivation and then activation?

 

Thank you for the quick response.


Let me add this is for Tibco ibi omni OHD application.


Hi @sgilla , I’m afraid this is a specific to TIBCO IBI/OMNI and not really to the Ataccama core engine.

Please reach out to Tibco support.

Thanks,

Ales


thank you @Ales 


Reply