I set up an SLA for approvals: Issue should be approved within 10 business days. The SLA is displayed correctly in the issue view as far as I see.
Furthermore, I have 3 automation rules:
Since I have the SLA in place, all issues have been approved within 1 or 2 days, so there should no rule should have been triggered. Rule 1 and 3 never have been triggered, indeed.
However, in some cases, rule 2 has been executed. I don't understand why. Rule 1 and 2 are configured very similar. Only the number of days until the SLA is about to breach differs (1: about to breach in 7 days, 2: about to breach in 3 days).
I don't unterstand:
I have no clue... Any idea on how to debug this is greatly appreciated!
Best regards,
Tim
@Joseph Chung Yin and others:
The rule keeps on firing. Interesting fact: There's one issue that was created yesterday and the approval was declined immediately. The issue was then automatically closed. However, exactly 24 hours after the creation, the rule fired (on the closed issue!). Any ideas why this is the case? The SLA doesn't even run anymore when the issue is closed.
@Tim H_ -
Can you provide more information on your SLA configurations setup? So we can assist you further.
Best, Joseph Chung Yin
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Dear @Joseph Chung Yin
Thank you for your reply. I'm using JSMs internal SLA mechanism. My SLA is called "Time to Approvement". My goal is set to 80 hours (=10 days) for all issues that match this JQL:
project = MY-PROJECT AND created >= 2024-10-28
Start: Approval status, End: Approved status. I'm using a 8x5 calendar: Mo-Fr, 8 am to 4 pm.
In the issue view, everything looks good. All issues that I checked use this SLA and it is shown that there is more than a week until there is a breach.
Here is some JSON data of an issue that (wrongly) triggered the "about to breach in 3 day" rule:
{
"isInvalid": null,
"rawValue": null,
"reason": null,
"timeline": {
"events": [
{
"date": 1730976334630,
"dateString": "2024-11-07T10:45:34.630Z",
"types": [
"START"
]
}
]
},
"ongoingSLAData": {
"goalId": 145,
"startTime": 1730976334630,
"paused": false,
"thresholdData": {
"calculatedAt": 1731080381164,
"remainingTime": 243934630,
"thresholdsConfigChangeDate": 1729581741817,
"thresholdsConfigChangeMsEpoch": 1729581741816
}
},
"completeSLAData": [],
"metricId": 38,
"definitionChangeDate": 1729763265623,
"definitionChangeMsEpoch": 1729763265623,
"definitionChangeDateString": "2024-10-24T09:47:45.623Z",
"goalsChangeDate": 1731080375867,
"goalsChangeDateString": "2024-11-08T15:39:35.867Z",
"goalsChangeMsEpoch": 1731080375866,
"goalTimeUpdatedDate": 1729763479983,
"goalTimeUpdatedDateString": "2024-10-24T09:51:19.983Z",
"goalTimeUpdatedMsEpoch": 1729763479982,
"customFieldId": 13000,
"customFieldName": "Dauer bis zur Genehmigung",
"metricCreatedDate": 1729581741816
}
The issue was created on 2024-11-07. The breach should be around Nov 21/22. The warnings should, thus, approximately be on Nov 12 (1st) and 18 (2nd).
Today is Nov 8 and Jira already fired rule no. 2 (the 2nd warning, which should be on Nov 18).
As far as I can see, everything regarding the SLA looks good.
The rules 1+2 are almost identical. They are triggered when an SLA is about to breach. in 7 or 3 days respectively.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Online forums and learning are now in one easy-to-use experience.
By continuing, you accept the updated Community Terms of Use and acknowledge the Privacy Policy. Your public name, photo, and achievements may be publicly visible and available in search engines.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.