Unable to update sys_update_set_source table using Table API

mansing
Giga Contributor

Hi,

I'm trying to create a remote instance object using REST API however in REST API explorer the table 'sys_update_set_source' shows does not exist. Is there anything wrong I have been doing here?

I am trying to create a new Remote instance with source (dev) SNOW instance URL and credentials so I can move the update sets from dev to QA instance.

find_real_file.png

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

tony_barratt
ServiceNow Employee
ServiceNow Employee

Hi Mansing,



The end point is described here:


curl "https://instance_name.service-now.com/api/now/table/sys_update_set_source" --request POST --header "Accept:application/json" --header "Content-Type:application/json" --data "{\"short_description\":\"test\"}" --user 'admin':'admin'



The REST api explorer will not build the query for you, as the target table is not selectable in the Explorer api.


This is, I suppose, intentional as was not anticipated that it would be useful to use REST on the sys_update_set_source.


I am not so convinced either 😉



If you try the curl code above, it will fail because setting the short description is not sufficient to pass the validation.


Actually the same validation that is applied when creating a new record in sys_update_set_source - name and URL etc


So this fragment   --data "{\"short_description\":\"test\"}" requires extending to populate additional fields.


I suggest trying this in sub prod BTW...



Screen Shot 2017-09-26 at 9.33.38 AM.png




If the reply was informational, please like, mark as helpful or mark as correct!





View solution in original post

12 REPLIES 12

To be very honest, this seems a overkill.



This is just a one time activity of adding instances and you won't have more than 3-4 entries to add manually.


Anyway its your decision to investigate and spend time on this.


Hi Kalaiarasan P,



You are right however we would be deploying the update sets to multiple targets and we are trying to integrate it with Jira so it can be synced with it.


Chris M3
Tera Guru

I would assume you were just using the REST API Explorer to test the calls?



The drop down appears to filter out in much the same way as the Reports module filters out tables.. that is 'mysteriously'.   However, the Table API does work for this table, much like a report could, if you could select the table.



So, I would suggest just using a REST tool and testing out your calls against one of your instances.   It shouldn't be too difficult to set that up.


mansing
Giga Contributor

1. Yes, I am using REST API explorer.



2. I tried with different keyword in drop down but it appears with no results matching to this table.



3. What REST tool, like CURL, SOAP UI? if yes, in order to test with these tools I would at least need the end point which is something I am trying to build it from REST API explorer. I hope I have not misunderstood you.


tony_barratt
ServiceNow Employee
ServiceNow Employee

Hi Mansing,



The end point is described here:


curl "https://instance_name.service-now.com/api/now/table/sys_update_set_source" --request POST --header "Accept:application/json" --header "Content-Type:application/json" --data "{\"short_description\":\"test\"}" --user 'admin':'admin'



The REST api explorer will not build the query for you, as the target table is not selectable in the Explorer api.


This is, I suppose, intentional as was not anticipated that it would be useful to use REST on the sys_update_set_source.


I am not so convinced either 😉



If you try the curl code above, it will fail because setting the short description is not sufficient to pass the validation.


Actually the same validation that is applied when creating a new record in sys_update_set_source - name and URL etc


So this fragment   --data "{\"short_description\":\"test\"}" requires extending to populate additional fields.


I suggest trying this in sub prod BTW...



Screen Shot 2017-09-26 at 9.33.38 AM.png




If the reply was informational, please like, mark as helpful or mark as correct!