Sorry if I read your description incorrectly. It's a bit late, waiting for job to finish.
I had the same use case a few years back. The response I got from support was similar, but more flexible.
First, If I recall correctly, FTS+MFS should only be used on regular forms - it will have issues with updates otherwise.
Secondly, to accomplish this you need to make the changes in AST:Attributes (Asset) and BMC.CORE:BMC_BaseElement (CMDB).
AST:Attributes is straight forward, but you are strongly discouraged to make changes with developer studio on CMDB classes (do not to touch it).
You can do it, but it is, as far as I know, not supported, You need to make the change in Base Development mode - not Best Practice Mode.
This means that you need to make sure that the changes you make to BMC.CORE:BMC_BaseElement are persistent when you perform an upgrade. It has never been an issue for me though - not sure if the upgrade program keeps track of the change or if it is the three-way reconciliation (it probably is).
Oh, and for the product information you need to make changes to PCT:Product Catalog (you probably want to make the same changes for operational categorization too, it helps when entering tickets if you can avoid stepping through tiers).
Also, if it breaks, you get to keep both pieces.
It works for us, but no promises.
I agree that the response from support is astonishing. I wonder what they think we use Asset Management and serach for. Also, it seems to not be in line with how the developers of Smart IT see it.
Hello Peter Lundqvist,
Firstly big thanks that you answered my question. Finally someone. I see this as a big disadvantage and am surprised nobody else confirm this is an issue.
Unfortunately even what you write doesn't really help. As I wrote in my question:
>>>(and tried to modify either BMC.CORE form)
I really tried to set also the Short Description Field on BMC_BaseElement Form but it didn't help. The search works on MFS:MultiFormSearch form but not in global search. And this was also confirmed by support as following:
I have received the update from BMC. The Engineering team have confirmed that the behavior seen is expected. FTS is working, as evidenced by the fact that searching for the CIs using the MFS form returns results. The problem is that the global search does not include CIs in the sources it searches to get results, as per the documentation mentioned previously (https://docs.bmc.com/docs/itsm2002/using-global-search-909628276.html).
The global search is not the same as an unqualified search via the MFS form.
For the global search to include CIs in the sources it searches you would need to raise an RFE (Request for Enhancement).
So as per BMC understanding, global is actually not global. I can explain however I want that the data are indexed and for me it is not CIs but data which I want to search in. It is an RFE. This is beauty of BMC.Even after 10 years I still wonder......
Sorry, I somehow missed the part about "Global search".
Yeah, I used to be bummed by that, but after switching to Smart IT it never really was an issue for us..
Very few users, except for we who admin the system, use our midtier now, and those who do use the specialized applications that has custom search functionality.
My main concern now, as I strive to limit the amount of customizations, is that this is somehow not system defaults for FTS.
Actually SmartIT is exactly my problem. The customer wants to use it but the Asset Search (SmartIT does it directly in DB for Assets) is fixed to following fields:
and this is just not enough. it cannot be extended. We need the ci description and two custom fields which are important to be able to use SmartIT Asset part for 100%. I thought that is easy. We will put the fields into FTS and voila. Not with BMC
thanks Peter for your interest.
If i recall correctly, fts indexed fields on cmdb might impact reconciliation identify results. But maybe I confuse this with fts indexed fields on product catalog & normalization. Anyway, it might be a good idea to check those after fts indexing.