Skip to content

Novacura Flow Classic

Welcome to the ideas forum for Novacura Flow. Please share your ideas for how we can make Novacura Flow better. We are listening and we use this feedback to prioritize our roadmap!

Novacura Flow Classic

Categories

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

7 results found

  1. In the context we hae customers like Elvia and soon DSB where flow is having a usage of 300+ projections. With frequent updates in IFS ( ever green with new releases every 6 month and service updates in addition). The projections needs to be recompiled one by one. This is timeconsuming and have a risk of not handling it correctly.

    I would be great and useful to add an option/button/way to easily re-download the metadata of all enabled projections and re-compile them in OData connector.

    Especially, after an update of IFS, it would be great to do it manually.

    Even…

    11 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Connectors  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. In some connectors for example FileSystem we need the ability to handle errors and sometimes ignore them.

    5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Connectors  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. Users encounter an issue when changing connectors for a specific flow. Currently, when an operation result indicates a failure, it is challenging to pinpoint which step within the flow has encountered the issue. As a result, users are compelled to manually review each step to identify the failed ones, causing unnecessary delays and frustration.

    8 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Connectors  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Thank you for voting on this feature request. Our product team is currently reviewing it and evaluating its feasibility and potential impact. We will keep you updated on any progress.

  4. Currently, while flow 6 connectors handle REST-API errors based on status codes, they fall short in handling timeouts. A feature that handles timeouts would greatly improve our application's error management.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Connectors  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. Microsoft is discontinuing basic HTTP authentication for Exchange on October 1st. While SMTP basic authentication, which appears to be used in our email connectors, will continue to function based on Microsoft's documentation:

    Deprecation of Basic Authentication in Exchange Online

    Considering this deprecation, Microsoft advises us to explore alternative options. Anticipating that similar queries may arise from various customers, we kindly request the development of a new email connector (or an update to the existing one) that supports alternative authentication protocols. This proactive approach will help address potential customer demands as they begin to inquire about this change more frequently.

    7 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Connectors  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. we would like to use both the eq and the in operator on the same entity within a set and if the IN operator consist of only one “value” then the connector will crash and give the following error “Operation failed. Multiple key predicates cannot be specified for the same entity set.“ but if you set more than one “value” it will work as intended.

    4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Connectors  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. We would like “Order of attributes“ is an example where attributes have no order to be ordered alphabetically. In Read operation keys (indicated bold already at the moment) could be first in the list and the remainder of the list should be ordered alphabetically.

    3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Connectors  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Thank you for voting on this feature request. Our product team is currently reviewing it and evaluating its feasibility and potential impact. We will keep you updated on any progress.

  • Don't see your idea?