Static Gift Batch Queries Question

Mark Zigadlo

We currently have static gift batch queries created for all new batches, but no one (gift processing team) seems to recall why or has had a need to refer back to them.

Does anyone have insight into how they might be useful and when?

I am trying to decide if I should disable them since they just look like query clutter to me (not a gift processor)

Thank you

Mark

Miki Martin

@Mark Zigadlo Welcome to Community! I am guessing those processing gifts have a particular selection marked once they start the Commit process. This is the first screen after selecting to Commit a batch. They just need to uncheck this to stop producing them.

I would check to see if any other queries or reports use these gift queries to produce data, though. I'm guessing not since each query is named differently but it's still wise to check to be sure. You can select a specific query and at the bottom you should be able to see if it's used anywhere.

Alex Wong

@Mark Zigadlo
this is used by gift processor usually for gift receipting processing, though it i not needed. There is better way to handle using a dynamic query that's set to “ask” for the batch number.

JoAnn Strommen

@Mark Zigadlo Have been at org that used query for receipting. Currently do not create or use as receipting done by gift date.

If needed to query gifts in a batch, to perhaps correct a date or something, one can always create a query using Gift > batch # > equals XXX.

Sunshine Reinken Watson

@Mark Zigadlo
I've used them for batch reports, acknowledgement letters, and (very seldomly) to global delete a batch of gifts that need to be redone. While a query can be created based on the batch number, the static queries are quicker if your gift processors rely on them for reports and acknowledgements/receipts. Is there a reason why you need to disable them?

Sunshine Reinken Watson

@Mark Zigadlo
I suggest saving batch queries in specific query category folder to reduce clutter.

Alex Wong

@Sunshine Reinken Watson
putting in category helps a little, but huge number of queries is cluttering your database.

If static query is to continue to be used, there is no reason to keep them more than a few months. So an active process should exists to delete static queries.

Mark Zigadlo

@Sunshine Reinken Watson
Thank you for your response.

No “need” except they are introducing a lot of “clutter” when non-technical staff are trying to find queries that get buried in all the batch queries, and if they are not being used (which I strongly think they are not) I'd prefer not to have them created in the first place.

Emmet O'Conlon

@Mark Zigadlo I echo @Sunshine Reinken Watson and @Alex Wong: We use them here, save them in a folder/category, but after three months, we delete them. They are useful and helpful for acknowledgments, review, and a few other internal processes tied to initial entry and review, but they have no long term value.

Dariel Dixon

@Mark Zigadlo I'd keep them for now. They are a bit of a security blanket. In case you need them or a batch goes awry, you have the static query. Perhaps creating folders for these might reduce the “clutter", but I'd be very cautious to remove these just under the guise of making it easy to find queries when there is a search function.

That said, query management needs to be completely overhauled. There's no easy way to clean up queries en masse.

Alex Wong

@Dariel Dixon
the batch being deleted doesn't affect neither the static query nor a dynamic query that filter on Batch Number.

Batch Number is just a text field on the gift record that is being filter, doesn't have direct connection to the committed batch that created the gifts.

For any “usage” of the static query that is bring replied to here in this post, a dynamic query that filter on batch # serve the same purpose.

Dariel Dixon

@Alex Wong I have seen situations where a gift doesn't pull into a dynamic query on batch number, but is in the static query. shrugs. It's not supposed to happen, but stranger things do occur from time to time.

Deleting the batch isn't the issue at all. There's always going to be one-time use queries for things. And queries that are saved “just in case”. I think it's worth considering, but I wouldn't make the change right now. This might be something to think about in another couple of months, and then going through the process of deleting the old queries and not saving the new ones.

We all probably could prune queries more often.