...

• Benefits of removing:
  • Strategically, if two file preprocessing methods are not needed, then we should progress to that end state.
  • Avoid additional work to improve refactor Custom Record Processing to support improved preprocessing management and sharing capabilities planned for Customer File Processing.
  • However, we will need to identify a migration strategy for customers currently using Custom Record Processing.
• Benefits of retaining:
  • If there are use cases for agent-specific processing. NEED INPUT
  • Opportunity to incorporate invocation of ODS /API from agent preprocessor (rather than data map preprocessor), which naturally aligns with the concrete API server connection.

...

• API invocation is supported by Custom Record Processing (Agent)
  • This works well if we are confident that any logic requiring use of the API happens after the file has been converted to tabular data by the Custom File Processor.
  • However, it is of course only applicable if we retain the Custom Record Processing capability.
• API invocation is supported by Custom File Processing (Data Map)
  • Building a Data Map requires discovery of the source file columns. When a Custom File Processor is used and that script requires use of the API, then we must prompt for an API Connection for executing the script (per Multi-Connection enhancements).
  • If we use this approach, it may be preferred that ODS API support for the preprocessor is explicitly enabled as a configuration option for each applicable Preprocessor script.
• API invocation is supported by Custom Record Processing and Custom File Processing
  • This favors flexibility for undiscovered use cases.

User Interface Changes

Database Changes