User Update Rule Fails (Possible Bug v24.1)

[hatchz]

Hello everyone,

We have run into an issue after recently updating to v24.1 where user update rule does not seem to run after updating a user through the UI.

The hanarule is set to trigger when user is updated through UI with the following advanced query:

a.statuskey = 0 AND ##a.statuskey is updated## AND 
(a.employeeType = 'EMPLOYEE' OR a.employeeType = 'EXTERNAL MANAGER' OR a.employeeType = 'CONTRACTOR') AND 
(a.leaveStatus = 'TERM PEND' OR a.leaveStatus = 'TERM FINAL' OR a.leaveStatus = 'TERM PAY' OR a.leaveStatus = 'INACTIVE') 
AND a.customproperty10 != 'TRUE' AND a.customproperty47 = 'true' AND a.customproperty22 is null

We updated the user through the UI and changed the statuskey to 'Inactive' (or '0') and leaveStatus was changed from 'ACTIVE' to 'TERM FINAL' and the user update rule never fired as expected.  Additional attempts to update only the statuskey or the leaveStatus have also failed.

I did also find this in the log, which I wasn't able to decipher:

2024-03-07T12:56:19-07:00-ecm-worker--null-nzdmg--2024-03-07T19:56:19.170005523Z stdout F 2024-03-07 19:56:19,169 [quartzScheduler_Worker-1] DEBUG changeaction.UserChangeActionService - hql userupdate --select a.id from Users a where a.id=110068 AND (( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) OR ( 1 = 2 ) AND 1=1 )

 Any ideas? Anything to check for in the logs specifically?

Thanks in advance!

Zach

[rushikeshvartak]

Can you check execution trail and share logs in file

[hatchz]

Hello @rushikeshvartak,

I checked the execution trail but I'm not sure how to export any of the information there.  I will post the important information below.

JOBID: 221731
DATEADDED: 2024-03-07 19:56:14.0
Changemap: {"statuskey":[1,0],"leaveStatus":["ACTIVE","TERM FINAL"]}
RULEACTIONFAILED: <field is blank>
RULEACTIONSUCCESSFUL: <field is blank>
RULEACTIONTOBEFIRED: <field is blank>
NEWDATA: <only change is to values of statuskey and leaveStatus>
OLDDATA: <previous values for statuskey and leaveStatus>
COMMENTS: <rule run is successful>

Attached are logs surrounding the time of the job.

Sorry, @indrahema95 - we are testing changes to a user update rule to begin separation processes for a terminated user - disable AD and Exchange accounts, re-run provisioning rules for roles and remove birthright if condition fails, etc.  We will be triggering off a change of the statuskey (and/or leaveStatus, hence the testing) based on HR data and preprocessing in the connector to the HR system, but we were testing the rule and changes in UI to confirm it was structured and would trigger as expected when we ran into this issue.

Thank you both!

Zach

[rushikeshvartak]

Does same works when you update from IMport sheet ?

[hatchz]

Using an import sheet does not trigger, but we have not updated the rule to match at this time, so that is expected.

I'm attaching logs from the import sheet update for your reference.

[rushikeshvartak · Accepted solution]

Create a similar rule and try

[hatchz · Accepted solution]

Created a similar rule, and found that we had to check that 

a.customproperty47

was either true or null or the actions would not trigger.  We thought that with an update to SQL we would no longer need to specify checks for null values, as they were inherently checked, but it appears that does not apply to the rule checks (which seem to use HQL?).  After updating the rules, they were triggered successfully.  Thank you for the help!

[indrahema95]

Hi @hatchz Can you please tell what is the action you are trying to perform? 

Regards,

Indranil