We just upgraded our DEV system from 9.0.1 to 9.3.0. After doing so, we noticed that our imports were failing.
Previously we had Customer - Internal linked to both our Active Directory and to an External Data connection. We would get the error, "A column named 'name' already belongs to this DataTable." Our External Data import did not have that column name. Our AD did. Long story short we got around it by naming them the same, but it failed after the upgrade.
As a workaround, we tried removing our AD connection and our LDAP connections, then throw everything in our External Data connection (DB). This did not work.
Now, Cherwell is giving the same error, just for the correct fields. "A column named 'FullName' already belongs to this DataTable."
- I have recreated the Scheduled Import as well to verify nothing is sticking somehow to the old import.
- We have also created a different Database View to link to.
Is there any chance you've specified that field more than once, either in the import field list, or, also, maybe in the default grid for that business object?
Not that I know of. Remember, we did not change anything initially to get this error. It just stopped working. I did double check and no, we are not duplicating any field.One oddity though is that Cherwell's Query to our database asks for the same fields multiple times. Looking at our Production environment, that is the same.
That's really interesting. I'm stumped on that. Any response from Cherwell Support?
So far, they are able to replicate it with an AD and External Data connection on their side. They are checking to see if this is a bug or something else.
Just not sure how more people are not posting on this if this is a widespread bug.
V9.3 is somewhat new. Upgrades haven't always been "seamless" the way that they're advertised, so a lot of customers wait a while before upgrading.
For example - I am working with a company that is on V8.3.1 right now.
Dave Keller recently mentioned on another post he's working with a customer on a V8.3.1 system as well.
A lot of customers are hesitant to upgrade; so there may not be a lot of people that have run into this issue yet that also use the community site. It's possible there are others that are only communicating with cherwell-support on the issue as well.
Another cause of this is that company's may not upgrade immediately unless there's a new feature that they absolutely need. For example, I've ignored the V9.0.1 release, V9.1.0 release, V9.2.x release, etc, because there were few new features that actually benefitted/were important to the company(s) I was working with at the time, as well as some issues that were reported with each of those.
However, V9.3 has some features that I really do find valuable, and I'll likely be upgrading to it (or whatever the next release is) later this year, likely around june or later.