3936391 Green Ribbon

Right - that will work. Custom sublists are different but your approach is good.

Did you do this by creating a saved search, adding preferred vendor as an available filter, then adding it to vendors vis Setup > Customization > Sublists?

That formula needs to be used in the criteria. So for field in criteria you choose Formula (Date), and then in the popup you enter that formula in the formula field and then is within this week as the criteria. The formula isn't perfect - it won't find late December birthdays at the beginning of January or early January…

If you have a custom date field with a date for which only the month and day are valid, a formula (date) like this should work when tested against this week: to_date(to_char({custentityXXX},'MM/DD')||'/'||to_char({today},'YYYY'),'MM/DD/YYYY') Basically it takes the month and day components, concatenates with the current…

That was my guess

Here is the full (complicated) formula that works even at the beginning and end of the year. I have not been able to figure out a simpler way to do it. case when {custentityXXX} is not null then to_date(to_char({custentityXXX},'MM/DD')||'/'||to_char(to_number(to_char({today},'YYYY'))+(case when…

Sorry try when {custentityXXX} is not null then to_date(to_char({custentityXXX},'MM/DD')||'/'||to_char({today},'YYYY'),'MM/DD/YYYY') end

It's possibly a defect since the name field searches multiple fields for the value, though I haven't seen anything like that before. You could try using the "Name (Internal)" field and see if that helps.

You need to apply the criteria to that formula (date) field - test that that formula (date) field is this week.

The equivalent of MIN and MAX in formulas is LEAST and GREATEST.

try setting is cogs line=false

Unfortunately the list views for transactions are currently all shared.

yes, just choose "Date Created" and then in the popup choose "before", then "relative" and you can enter one hour ago.

try case when {custrecord_violation_caseid.internalid} is not null then 1 end with sum as the summary type

use {number} instead of 1 and null instead of 0 (or get rid of the else) I assume you have an "end"

That's not the formula I specified?

That may have been added by the UG software, if that were really in the formula it would probably have generated an error. It's not obvious to me why this formula is not working.

You can use a formula (numeric) - not sure exactly what fields those refer to but it would look like (sum({field1})-sum({field2}))/sum({field1}) Then apply a sum summary type. You can find out the field IDs using the fomrmula assistant which you get by clicking next tot he formula field.

marcusd - are you sending it as CSV?

Sorry should have been {tranid}

It seems to me that once you had a single change to the sales rep, any further change to the customer/lead/prospect that day, regardless of whether it affected the sales rep, would trigger an alert because it would always match the system note. It seems to me what you really want to do here is used subscribed fields.

It is an aggregate function that is not included in our summary type list, so you have to "trick" the system into accepting it as a summary type. I don't know of other functions like this - we added this behind the scenes a while back.

You should be able to do that with the created from search field - but also they are listed on the SO.

It would need to be a summary search grouped by name, e.g., and then your formula would be {today}-max({systemnotes.date}). You would add filters to the search for the field (maybe not the type, because if it hasn't changed you would just get the # of days since creation).

Corrected.

ns_concat works for this. group by ID and then add a formula ns_concat({value}) with summary type=max. Thanks, -e

Doable through system notes though the search may be a bit tricky.

It currently does not allow a delimeter to be specified, it always uses ","

What happened with that formula?

It may indeed because of the user keyword and us being overly protective for security purposes. Please see if you can work around it and if not then contact support. You might try just splitting the string in two and using ||. Thanks, -e