Skip to main content
cameron_wright
Gainsight Employee ⭐️⭐️
January 7, 2019
New Idea

rule results different from preview data

  • January 7, 2019
  • 35 replies
  • 587 views
After talking with a customer via a support case we discovered that when you preview the results of a rule they will not show the same as the results show.

For instance, in the first image below you see a preview data set to a rule, this shows the name of the data in the field. "Guided" is an example.

But in the second image this is a rule run result and it shows an ID (blanked out for privacy purposes).

This is as design but in the future myself and others would find it useful for these to be matching. Troubleshooting a rule or data validation is very hard when these do not match up.

The reason it is like:

The execution itself uses the actual data so we have GSID's for Picklist values in the logs.

But in rule setup preview we are converting these GSID's to Picklist names to avoid confusion while setting up the rule.

The way we would like it to work:

Show the datasets as the same so that we can validate and confirm data easily.





    35 replies

    anirbandutta
    Expert ⭐️
    January 28, 2022

    +@Ritesh Sharma @rakesh  

    It's an opportunity for engagement
    sarahmiracle
    VIP ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
    July 14, 2022

    Just ran into this on a JO I’m looking to implement where I have to know the contact role for a participant, and the preview shows me the name, but the participant execution shows the GSID value. I’ve hit this issue before in Rules, but in JO it’s quite frustrating as I’m hoping to display these values in reports to users. It also would help me confirm my participant source is set up correctly.

    Customer Success Systems Admin @ Amplitude, 3x Gainsight CS Ops Product Council Member
    Contributor ⭐️⭐️⭐️
    July 18, 2022

    +1

    We regularly use the report builder before building a JO to have an idea of recipient numbers, specially when we are being quite targeted in our campaigns. And we’ve also noticed the inconsistency across report builder and rules. 

    anirbandutta
    Expert ⭐️
    July 19, 2022

    @rakesh would you be able to share the latest?

    It's an opportunity for engagement
    rakesh
    Gainsight Employee ⭐️
    Lets put your data to work!
    July 19, 2022

    Hi All,

    The solution to the problems discussed here need multiple steps. 

    1. For picklists, we are solving this at fetch itself - https://share.getcloudapp.com/p9uOYvXv. In Data Designer, we already have it in production, 
    2. Rules Horizonization will bring the above experience to Rules Engine. This means you can always add a name field, for any field in data prep step itself to compare. 
    3. Actions results in Rules Engine

    I suspect the 3rd step is of utmost interest to every one here. One question - I am assuming that this problem exists when you download the execution history file. Would you be willing to wait a while (a few mins) after you hit download for us to generate the file which has a new column for name for every column with GSID’s? 

    As per my previous response, applications work on ID’s, not name. We are showing the same file that a system needs to function to you to debug today. If we auto generate names for every file to make them more readable, every rule will take more time. This is not a path we want to take. Estimated 100-400 customer’s rule might start timing out. cc: @veera