Running Job scheduler base on user request

SpyrootSpyroot Member Posts: 45
Hello folks, here is another challenge for me.

I'm running NAV 3.7 and I need to use schedule reports but in a different way; users wants to request reports and apply filters dynamically .

For instance:

User1 want to add Report #123 with posting date as filter.
User2 want to add Report#345 with posting date and sales person as filters.
User3 want to add Report#111 with five different filters.

Some times reports take longer to generate. They would like to setup reports to run at night.

They need the ability to change what reports to run.

is this possible?

Thanks.

Comments

  • jlandeenjlandeen Member Posts: 524
    One of the features of NAV that wasn't available in earlier versions is the Job Queue/Job Scheduler - see Tables in the 670 range and codeunits 448 and 449 in Base 5.0. It allows you to schedule reports to run when needed - but you may have to make some slight tweaks to provide filters through to the calling report.

    As this really can be a very useful feature of NAV I have had clients in the past upgrade their executables to 5.0 or 5.0 SP1 and then we moved these base objects out of a clean new 5.0 database and merged them into the clients older object set.

    Note that this would require your client to be current with their maintenance agreement with Microsoft. Also you will have to setup a NAS instance to run the Job Queue on a server - if you haven't used any NAS instances there should be 1 available with your client's base license agreement.
    Jeff Landeen - Sr. Consultant
    Epimatic Corp.

    http://www.epimatic.com
  • SpyrootSpyroot Member Posts: 45
    Thank you for your suggestion jlandeen,

    Unfortunately my customer still running NAV 3.70A :(

    In the mean time,I will continue researching until they decide to upgrade NAV.

    Thanks again.
  • jlandeenjlandeen Member Posts: 524
    Is the customer up to date on their support payments? It is possible to extract and use the functionality from 5.0 in an earlier version of the objects (I've done that with a client in the past and it's worked quite well).

    After working through a performance course last week it became very clear that regardless of which version of the NAV objects you're running being on the latest version of the executables tends to be a very good idea (especially if they're on SQL).
    Jeff Landeen - Sr. Consultant
    Epimatic Corp.

    http://www.epimatic.com
  • rdebathrdebath Member Posts: 383
    Job Scheduler and Job Queue are two distinct items.

    Running the Job Queue on executables before 5.0 would be annoying as it uses the newer GETLASTERROR functionality which doesn't exist before V5. That can be commented out but, well, annoying.

    The job scheduler exists on 3.60 already, but it's not NAS based. You have to have a normal client PC with the Job scheduler form running permanently. But, you'll probably want an 'AutoIt' script (or similar) to deal with random popups from the GUI.

    Though, point of interest, the PC, screen and normal user could well work out a lot cheaper than adding a NAS to your license. NASs are waaaay expensive.
  • jlandeenjlandeen Member Posts: 524
    Yes you're right the 2 are different but I look at Job Queue as the better version of Job Scheduler.

    While a NAS instance is expensive there should be 1 instance of NAS that is included with NAV on older clients/licenses.

    While older versions of the client do not implement the GETLASTERROR Text so it is not possible to run Job Queue on older executables but it is very possible to run older objects on newer executables. So to get the most out of the Job Queue in 5.0 with older objects (I think) would be to merge the new 5.0 objects into the existing client database and upgrade their client executable to 5.X.

    Especially if the client is running on SQL there are some very good reasons for being on the latest version of the executable even if the objects aren't going to be upgraded. Plus an executable upgrade should be significantly less expensive and less risky than a full upgrade to the objects.
    Jeff Landeen - Sr. Consultant
    Epimatic Corp.

    http://www.epimatic.com
Sign In or Register to comment.