Large Advanced JQL Search Criteria

[Andy Stevenson]

I'm searching a large quantity of key numbers in order to perform a bulk change. The search criteria box is so large that it obscures the search results. How can the search criteria / search results split be repositioned to show more of the results and less of the criteria?

[Tom Lister · Accepted solution]

Hi @Andy Stevenson

Try saving your long filter under some meaningful name "MyHugeJQL"

Then create a second query written as

filter = "MyHugeJQL"

works on my server install

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist- · Accepted solution]

You'll need to make copies of the query and add more clauses to it to break it down.

For example:

• Issuetype = bug (100,000 results)

Could lead to things like

• Issuetype = bug  and category = billable
• Issuetype = bug and assignee in (Alice, Bob, Charlie)

and so-on.

There are also some gadgets and reports you could use the filter with, which would summarise and allow drill-downs.  For example the simple filter-statistics maybe using project or assignee could allow a break-down.  I'm quite fond of the 2 dimensional gadget for showing two value breakdowns at a time, like project and status.

[Andy Stevenson]

My search looks like this:

project = STDB AND key in (STDB-995,STDB-1091,STDB-1483,STDB-1664,STDB-1806,STDB-2329, ...

STDB-9899, STDB-10001)

So with this many lines, the search results are obscured. I'm not sure how your suggestion helps me; notice my status is "I'm new here" so respect my ignorance please. 

Would it be possible to create a string variable containing all the key numbers so the search might look like:

project = STDB AND key = strVariable

 where strVariable = ((STDB-995,STDB-1091,STDB-1483, ... STDB-n)

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

No, that's not possible I'm afraid. 

I would look for a better way to identify issues than a list of keys.  For example, are you watching all of these (and not others in the project)?  Or could you put a label on each one?  What do they have in common?

[Andy Stevenson]

Their common thread is they all need the same field updated with missing information via a bulk change. The missing field is not a commonality to take advantage of as many issues in this project (STDB) are missing content in the field in question. Sounds like I'm stuck with breaking the search up into smaller lists of keys and making multiple bulk changes. Thanks for the inputs though.