Is the AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE revision specific

Is the AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE revision specific?  Does each revision have a different AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE?

Where is the AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE documented?

on August 28, 2019.
Add Comment
2 Answer(s)


Agile does not provide documentation on its underlying DB and so nothing on AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE

This sequence is used across several tables like item, change, rev, etc and so each row in REV table will have unique values

– Raj


Agile Angel Answered on August 28, 2019.
Add Comment

AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE has nothing to do with revisions. It is a defined sequence in the database to give EVERY record a unique ID, across the tables it is used for. So it is not reset for every revision, as ALL records in the REV table will have a unique ID, across all parts/documents. It is used for most (but not all) tables in the database.

And no, there is no published documentation for the Agile schema. Never has been, and since they are no longer selling the software, I doubt there ever will be.

Agile Angel Answered on August 29, 2019.

Hi Kevin,  your statement  AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE has nothing to do with revisions”  is not true.  Since it identifies a DB record which is a part it is either the the Part at the revision level or at the master level.   Your statements indicate that each revision has a different ID sequence.   The Agile product people, especially after being bought by Oracle, never understood PLM technology nor the business requirements.  This leaves us to struggle through and try to help the users make do with their software purchase mistakes.

on August 29, 2019.

Quite the opposite. AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE has nothing to do with parts or revisions, other than it is used to provide a unique database ID for both of those tables (and many others). Please define what you mean by “revision specific”.

 By what I think you are stating, it would require that every part have it’s own variation of AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE for it’s revisions. Which is not the case. For each part, yes, the revisions that are allowed MUST be unique, but AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE plays no part in what revision values can be used.

 AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE is just a numeric ID generator that is only used inside the database, and the ID values are never displayed to users. If you are talking about auto-number sequences, those are specific to classes or subclasses, but AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE plays no part in those. Yes, it provides a unique ID for every record, but that ID is never seen by the users, instead the object number is what is displayed. There is a separate field named ENCODE_NAME that guarantees that part numbers are unique.

on August 30, 2019.

Thx Kevin…let’s dig a little deeper.  The part table has an AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE for each row.  We are not planning to display the AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE to the user but we do need to specify a part number rev combination – If you do a search or issue a PX command we are not able to specify the number and rev only the number and the part returned is the latest released rev of the part not the latest rev that is pending on the ECO.  The PX updates the Supplier Table of the Part triggered by a Change to the Manufacturer Table.  The Change is happening to the Latest Rev which is the pending rev on the ECO.  When we query the Supplier Table and make changes they are being made to the Latest Released Rev (the one prior to the Latest Rev.   The changes are occurring on the Rev of the part in production that is supposed to be locked down.

We are trying use the AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE to access the Part, Supplier Table, … that are associated with the specific rev we want to work with.  The user can manually select the Rev but the PX cannot.  That has not worked because when we tried to Set the part using the AGILEOBJECTIDSEQUENCE (SourceID was a 7 or 8 digit number that we were able to query) it resulted in an Illegal Argument error.

I find it hard to believe that having a PX work on a specified rev isn’t very common.  I’ll plead ignorance and maybe we are missing something very obvious.  I’d be very happy to be enlightened.  Is there a way to do this?  Thx, Pete



on August 31, 2019.
Add Comment

Your Answer

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.