Limitations of Robust Transform Maps (RTMs) – Looking for Clarification and Best Practices

[Amit104]

Hi everyone,

I'm currently working with Robust Transform Maps (RTMs) and have encountered several limitations compared to legacy transform maps and IntegrationHub ETL. I’ve compiled a list based on my experience and some documentation, but I’d love to hear from others in the community to confirm or expand on these points.

Observed Limitations of RTMs:

1. No scripting support like onBefore or onAfter in the transform map itself.
2. Limited scripting in ETL Definition (sys_rte_eb_etl_definition) – classes like GlideCMDBUtil and CMDBTransformUtil are not available.
3. Cannot directly invoke IRE unless using IntegrationHub ETL or targeting a CMDB class.
4. Coalesce is the only built-in matching mechanism – no support for complex or multi-field matching logic.
5. No test/dry run support – difficult to preview transformations before committing data.
   
   My Use Case:
   I'm trying to import data into the core_company table using RTM and want to use IRE to prevent duplicates. I’ve set up Identification and Reconciliation Rules, but IRE doesn’t trigger unless I use IntegrationHub ETL or a legacy transform map. Calling IRE from the onBefore script in the ETL Definition also fails due to missing APIs.

Questions:

1. Are these limitations accurate and up-to-date?
2. Has anyone successfully triggered IRE from an RTM without using IntegrationHub ETL?
3. Are there any workarounds or best practices for using RTMs with non-CMDB tables?

Thanks in advance for your insights!

Best Regards,

Amit Dichwalkar