I have a pretty simple use case that I thought case expression fields would solve for until I hit the 5 criteria field limit for a single case. Similar to this post about the limitation of the number of cases, this limitation is, well, limiting.
The proposed solution in another similar thread was to do multiple case expressions across multiple transformation tasks, which seems redundant given this could be solved for in a single field if the limits were expanded.
Commenting for more visibility. Our use case is we often test out new processes and motions with various sub-segments of our customers based on various criteria, like ARR … # of users … region … etc. I often use case statements to help us operationalize these processes, but it means needing more than 5 criteria for my case expressions since I’m pulling in a variety of criteria to isolate a sub-segment of customers. This enhancement would really improve case statement efficiency
troubleshooting and making updates would be waaay easier too if a single concept didn’t have to be done across multiple statements.
I would support this request too. To Bradley’s point, we as Admins are generally going to find ways to work around these seemingly arbitrary limits anyways. In this case, we just create a number of additional tasks instead.
So we bypass the limit of five criteria, but in so doing,we just create additional tech debt, and become very frustrated in the process.
Much needed to avoid having to build redundant tasks (considering task limits too!).
Checking in on this one, would also like limits increased on general rule criteria too.
Thank you!
Hi All,
Thanks for bringing this post.
The hard technology limit we have here is the query character limit per task. Query length depends on a lot of factors (number of fields, filters, formula fields, case, etc.) but a single Case statement with 10+ filters consumes a lot and in earlier days this was particularly a big challenge hence we placed some limits per task based on the tasks data in Rules Engine. (Not as random as one would think).
But we will look into the latest data to check if the limits still make sense or not.
Hi@rakesh ,
Thank you for responding. Totally understand the limitation. The current limit for case statement filter is 5, whereas we are being allowed to have 10 different case statements. Having this limit increased from 5 to 10 for individual case filter criteria if possible would be amazing.
The total limit of only having overall 10 cases is a separate issue and I understand.
Thank you@anirbandutta for helping out.
This would be great - I just hit the limit on some statements I’m making and had to resort to a series of very specific “not in” conditions that feel very likely to explode if/when new values are added for the affected fields in the future. It would have been easier and arguably more future-proof for me to combine a “contains” and “does not contain” criterion to create a more flexible condition.