I have a multi valued lookup field that uses a static lookup with almost 80 values in it. At a certain point, this field is updated by a process which adds all of the lookup options into the field via a system action.
When I navigate to the field within a project, the entries in the field are not ordered alphabetically, nor are they listed in any order relating to the lookup itself (which is set to be ordered alphabetically anyway). I need it to be listed alphabetically.
Does anyone know how to resolve this or why it’s doing it?
I’d also like to make the field bigger so that you can see more of the entries – this is on a project properties page and not in the list view, although that is also annoying because the view expands the width of the field a crazy amount to accommodate all of the entries, even after setting the field width in the list.
I just tried the same. As you said, MVL shows the list in alphabetical order at times and different at other times. I have not seen any place in Clarity where you can configure the sorting of the MVL field values.
What product does your question refer to? I would be happy to move it to the right community to make sure it gets answered quickly.
i know for regular lookups, I have included numbers into the lookup and done an order by based on that number. You could try sneaking it into a union, or trying to set the order by a field that you guys manually create/sort/etc. Just an idea.
The table (ODF_MULTI_VALUED_LOOKUPS) where the data is held has an sequence number (SEQ) on it, but that does not seem to influence the display order
Agree that there isn't anywhere functional that we can influence the order, be interesting if we could determine a technical solution - i.e. work out why the GUI displays them in a specific order or if it is just down to the randomness of a database-sort at some point. Think would need to SQL-trace the screen to understand that though
Clarity, how do i do this?
Do you know how to run a sql trace? We have DB and App server support teams so i don't get the access that they do, do you think i'd need to engage people ont he DB side?
Already taken care of.
Before v13 it is detailed here; TEC435531 - https://support.ca.com/irj/portal/kbtech?docid=435531
V13 onwards here ; TEC573491 - https://support.ca.com/irj/portal/kbtech?docid=573491
Thanks, I'll have a go at this. Looks very handy too