Query check tmp Boarding Loc Service first same

From CCMDB Wiki
Revision as of 12:15, 2022 May 25 by Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) (→‎Log)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Data Integrity Checks
Summary: Validates that the DtTm for the first Service tmp entry is the same as that for the first Boarding Loc entry
Related: Boarding Loc, Service tmp entry
Firmness: hard check
Timing: complete
App: CCMDB.accdb
Coding: query check_tmp_Boarding_Loc_Service_first_same
Uses L Problem table: not relevant for this app
Status: implemented
Implementation Date: 2021-04-29
Backlogged: true
  • Cargo


  • SMW


  • Categories: 
  • form:

We decided during Task Team Meeting - Rolling Agenda and Minutes 2021#ICU Database Task Group Meeting – April 22, 2021 that the first Service tmp entry DtTm should be the same as that for the first Boarding Loc entry. This cross check validates that.

Uses convenience queries Created_FirstLocation query and Created_FirstService query

Discussed at task 2021-04-29 that this will remain complete only for now.

Log

  • 2022-05-25 - changed the query to a complete only query so the items can initially be entered as per Cognos, and only changed to our corrected values on chart completion, to allow keeping the Boarding Loc records linked to their counterpart Cognos2 Units table records* 2022-04-14 - removed Accept DtTm in preparation for retiring this concept
  • 2022-02-14 - excluded RecordStatus <>"sent" And <>"deleted"
  • 2022-02-09 - included check for Accept DtTm being same as well
  • 2021-10-07 - decided to shift this query to doing the check for complete and incomplete, since the Statistician does use this data for incomplete profiles
  • 2021-05-03 - updated Created_FirstLocation query and Created_FirstService query which had used "first" where they should have used "min"
  • 2021-04-29 - Implemented for RecordStatus = "complete" only because there were tons of errors that would prevent sending if I do it for all; do we want to shift to doing it for all?

Related articles

Related articles: