Help with SM Planned Maintenance Module

Jon23
Mega Sage

Trying to use the the SM Planned Maintenance application but it's not triggering a facilities request.

I've gone through the Wiki but still nothing - Anyone successfully using this module who can provide some help on where I may be going wrong?

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Jon23
Mega Sage

ServiceNow support have come back with a solution which correlates with claytonberry findings and appears to fix the issue



The issue was a Maintenance Plan (MP0000015) which was installed when I loaded the demo data.   This maintenance plan is looking at cmdb_ci_dc_inverter table, unfortunately that table does not exist on my instance.   Due to this issue no maintenance plans ran!!



I deleted the MP000015 plan and confirmed that my test maintenance plan generated a ticket - . (Still more testing to do but looks promising)



Dr.Bruce you probably installed the demo data and its the same issue. Let me know if it works for you.



It's concerning that one incorrect MP stops all plans from processing.   I also need to confirm if the first solution supplied (change the script include) is still needed.


View solution in original post

18 REPLIES 18

thanks - I've also created a call with SN so will let you know if I hear anything.


Worked through the issue with SN technicians yesterday via WebEx, and they're convinced it's a bug - sadly no fix yet, they've escalated it to their Problem team.


Hi, I've just had a response from SN ...


Looking at the PlannedMaintenanceUtils Script, they have recommended changing one line:


---


When running the code through the background scripts we see the following output



Evaluator: org.mozilla.javascript.EcmaError: Cannot convert null to an object.Caused by error in Script Include: 'PlannedMaintenanceUtils' at line 753



This issue can be fixed by updating the code in the Script Include below with the following on line 753:



Original:if (current.type.toString() == "model_based")



New:if (scheduleGr.plan.type.toString() == "model_based")


---


Currently testing this at the moment


I had the same response from SN  



Unfortunately it did not make any difference on my instance when i tested it



It will be interesting to see if it works for you!  


no luck here - i've got our account manager to see who they can kick