AnsweredAssumed Answered

Set Revision and Roll Back

Question asked by Nhat MAI on Apr 19, 2017
Latest reply on Apr 24, 2017 by Lars Uhlenhaut

Like • Show 0 Likes0
Comment • 4

Hello Everyone,

We recently ungraded our EPDM system from 2015 to 2017 and I was playing around with the new "Set Revision" Feature. I noticed that if you use Set Revision and try to "Roll Back" the revision change, the local revision is NOT roll back. You have to use the "Set Revision" command to roll it back. This is not a huge problem but I was wondering if this will affect the roll back revision that are done through transitions. This was a big problem in the past where you when you roll back increment revision transition, the local revision was not roll backed. You had to create a new transition that increment the revision in the minus direction (-1 increment in the setting).

Has anyone noticed any roll back problems with transition revisions? Any info would be appreciated. Thank you.

Nhat MAI Apr 20, 2017 4:08 PM

Correct Answer

Hello Everyone,

I created some test files and tested this situation. From my test, rolling back the "increment revision" done through a transition will roll back the local revision as well. Thanks for all the input.

See the reply in context

No one else had this question

Outcomes

Amos Avery Apr 20, 2017 11:49 AM

Unfortunately I have not experienced problems with the roll back feature that I can share. The reason for this is that we do not use the roll back feature as it eliminates history that may be useful in the future. To roll back a revision, we 1) transition the file into a change state, 2) use get version to get the older version of the file, 3) use set revision to set the revision to a value one increment before the target revision and then 4) process the release. The result is a file in the previous condition, at the previous revision, but with our history intact showing the change backward. The flaw in the process is that it's possible to choose the wrong version in the get version step or choose the wrong revision in the set revision step resulting in the wrong roll back. I am always in favor of retaining history, however, and with this method, it can be corrected if mistakes are made. Using roll back is like wielding an axe that removes history forever.

Actions

Tim Webb Apr 20, 2017 12:45 PM

Hi Nhat MAI,

I personally recommend reserving rollbacks for admin only usage and should not be an operation that would be employed regularly to avoid creating suspicious data activity in your data management history.

That being said, I too use the method Amos mentioned for creating a fake rollback.

Tim CEPA

Believe in The Q!

Actions

Nhat MAI Apr 20, 2017 4:08 PM

Hello Everyone,

I created some test files and tested this situation. From my test, rolling back the "increment revision" done through a transition will roll back the local revision as well. Thanks for all the input.

Actions

Lars Uhlenhaut @ Nhat MAI on Apr 24, 2017 4:19 AM

We also made the update from 2016 to 2017. For us the solution was the following. Files (not versions) created BEFORE the update to 2017 has to be set back their internal revision manually at rollback. Files (not versions) created AFTER the update set back the internal revision automatically at rollback.

Actions

4 Replies

Amos Avery Apr 20, 2017 11:49 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Unfortunately I have not experienced problems with the roll back feature that I can share. The reason for this is that we do not use the roll back feature as it eliminates history that may be useful in the future. To roll back a revision, we 1) transition the file into a change state, 2) use get version to get the older version of the file, 3) use set revision to set the revision to a value one increment before the target revision and then 4) process the release. The result is a file in the previous condition, at the previous revision, but with our history intact showing the change backward. The flaw in the process is that it's possible to choose the wrong version in the get version step or choose the wrong revision in the set revision step resulting in the wrong roll back. I am always in favor of retaining history, however, and with this method, it can be corrected if mistakes are made. Using roll back is like wielding an axe that removes history forever.
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
Tim Webb Apr 20, 2017 12:45 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Hi Nhat MAI,
I personally recommend reserving rollbacks for admin only usage and should not be an operation that would be employed regularly to avoid creating suspicious data activity in your data management history.

That being said, I too use the method Amos mentioned for creating a fake rollback.

Tim CEPA
Believe in The Q!
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
Nhat MAI Apr 20, 2017 4:08 PM
Unmark Correct
Correct Answer
Hello Everyone,

I created some test files and tested this situation. From my test, rolling back the "increment revision" done through a transition will roll back the local revision as well. Thanks for all the input.
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- Lars Uhlenhaut @ Nhat MAI on Apr 24, 2017 4:19 AM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  We also made the update from 2016 to 2017. For us the solution was the following. Files (not versions) created BEFORE the update to 2017 has to be set back their internal revision manually at rollback. Files (not versions) created AFTER the update set back the internal revision automatically at rollback.
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions

Set Revision and Roll Back

Outcomes

Related Content

Recommended Content