Errors out of 6.0.2 Patch

[Mike Campbell]

Version 6.0.2 – Running on AIX box.

Okay Clovertechies…

  We applied the 6.0.2 patch to our existing 6.0 Cloverleaf.

  Since then we have had some ‘odd’ things happen.  We had to modify 3 Xlates, that were working prior to the patch, to carry out the element on an ‘IF’ statement to include an extra .[0].  Otherwise it was throwing an error on more than one value found in an IF.  

 Anyone else have that problem?  I’ll post a question to Infor as well, and let you know that I find out.

Thanks.

Mike Campbell

Topic

[Jim Kosloskey]

Mike,

We get that error on 6.0.0 (and previously as well). That is a correct error as if the IF sees multiple components (let’s say you specified a field level) it does not know which one to use.

I will suggest that it is possible the source system may have begun populating multiple components in a previously single component field or su-components in a component field just after you installed the patcch and thus it is coincidence rather than a flaw in the product.

email: jim.kosloskey@jim-kosloskey.com 29+ years Cloverleaf, 59 years IT - old fart.

[Mike Campbell]

I would agree with the comment Jim, except I applied the patch several months earlier and encountered the same problem, and backed it out until I could research what needed to change in the Xlates.  

We also had an instance where information in the OBX-5 was passing okay in the 6.0 version, but the embedded ‘&’ started causing issues with the patch.  Luckily we know a quick workaround for the ampersand mapping.

[Jim Kosloskey]

Mike,

Yes 6.0.0 did some strange things with inappropriately place sub-component separators in components. I had heard this unexpected behavior was returned to normal in one of the patch releases.

So specifically what was the IF checking before modification and what as the data content (please block out any patient info)?

In other words was the IF checking a field or a component?

email: jim.kosloskey@jim-kosloskey.com 29+ years Cloverleaf, 59 years IT - old fart.

[Mike Campbell]

Well, here is the answer from Infor support:

   We changed how we handled subcomponents in 6.0, then rolled it back in 6.0.1.

   

   So that’s why you did not see it in 6.0 but you did in 6.0.2…

   

What the details or inner reasons why I do not know…but it seems it was by design.

Also I checked the 6.0.2 release notes and noticed that it’s stated in there as well.

“Rollback changes causes copying HL7 subcomponents behavior change (9548)”

Must have missed that comment in the release notes.

[Author]

Replies