Trouble with attribute flow precedence in FIM 2010 Sync Engine
I have two inbound attribute flows in the same MA. These are configured as Direct: cs.DisplayName->mv.DisplayName cs.AccountName->mv.DisplayName I want to make the first flow (cs.DisplayName->mv.DisplayName) have precedence over the second flow. I go to the Metaverse Designer and choose person and then the DisplayName attribtue. I can see there are 2 inbound attribute flows. However, when I choose "Configure Attribute Flow Precedence," only one of my attribute flows is shown and I cannot configure the precedence. This is a problem for a couple of reasons: 1 - This behavior has changed since ILM 2007 - I have existing configurations that use this method. 2 - Depending on the order in which I create the attribute flows, I get different results when viewing the Configure Attribute Flow Precedence screen. 3 - It is particularly problematic in the case of the FIM Service MA where advanced attribute flows are not allowed and there is no other way to set precedence on an inbound attribute flow. I opened a bug on Connect and it was closed "Working as Designed" which seems surprising because this is such a large change in behavior from previous versions. Has anyone else seen this behavior? Suggested work-arounds or next steps? Thanks! -Jeremy
April 30th, 2010 8:36pm

Jeremy - We're having the same problem. Did you ever get a resolution from MS? We're finding the 'invisible' flow will work, but you have to stack / unstack attribute flows and 'guess' where the invisible flow is, like a black hole. However, if you examine precedence that includes one of these 'invisible' attribute flows in it, and hit 'ok' instead of 'cancel', you will hoark up precedence and have to unstack / stack attribute flows in MAs again in order to put the phantom flow in the right order. Hard to believe this is 'working as designed' - :/ The potential for messing up precedence for, say, proxyAddresses on 400k objects just by hitting 'ok' (forget just GUESSING where invisible flows are!) is unacceptable... - alan b
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
June 30th, 2011 1:57pm

Jeremy- I'm not sure as to what the change in behavior was here, but, perhaps you could work around this by using an Advanced flow in your MA such that you calculate the precedence manaully (and thus a given MA only contributes one possible value for an MV attribute)? EDIT - Just realized this thread is a year old. If the issue is still there, this might be a solution for Alan. My Book - Active Directory, 4th Edition My Blog -
June 30th, 2011 7:12pm

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other recent topics Other recent topics