Reserved de-dupe rules
I'm wanting to refine the de-duping rules, but first of all I'd like to find out exactly what the predefined rules are before I create my own. They are reserved, so you can't edit them, which is fine, but it only tells you which fields they use and not what the weights and thresholds are so the full behaviour is not clear.
duplicate-contacts
add a comment |
I'm wanting to refine the de-duping rules, but first of all I'd like to find out exactly what the predefined rules are before I create my own. They are reserved, so you can't edit them, which is fine, but it only tells you which fields they use and not what the weights and thresholds are so the full behaviour is not clear.
duplicate-contacts
add a comment |
I'm wanting to refine the de-duping rules, but first of all I'd like to find out exactly what the predefined rules are before I create my own. They are reserved, so you can't edit them, which is fine, but it only tells you which fields they use and not what the weights and thresholds are so the full behaviour is not clear.
duplicate-contacts
I'm wanting to refine the de-duping rules, but first of all I'd like to find out exactly what the predefined rules are before I create my own. They are reserved, so you can't edit them, which is fine, but it only tells you which fields they use and not what the weights and thresholds are so the full behaviour is not clear.
duplicate-contacts
duplicate-contacts
asked 10 hours ago
Mick KahnMick Kahn
641216
641216
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
If you have access to the database type
SELECT * from civicrm_dedupe_rule r inner join civicrm_dedupe_rule_group rg on rg.id = r.dedupe_rule_group_id;
which will give you a table which isn't pretty but is mostly understandable.
Ah you're right. I'll update answer.
– Demerit
9 hours ago
Thanks that tells me what I need, so I have deleted my earlier comment on your previous version of the answer
– Mick Kahn
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Using Demerit's correct and useful answer above, here are the details in plain text of the three pre-configured rules that you can't see by the normal method, so may be of use to others:
Name and Email (reserved): Supervised: Individual
First Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Last Name: Length "null", Weight 7
Email: Length "null", Weight 10
Threshold 20
Email (reserved): Unsupervised: Individual
Email: Length "null", Weight 10
Threshold 20
Name and Address (reserved): General: Individual
First Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Last Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Street Address: Length "null", Weight 5
Middle Name: Length "null", Weight 1
Suffix: Length "null", Weight 1
Threshold: 15
Not blaming you at all but some of those look a bit nuts. Is it possible you mis-copied the Email Unsupervised? Having Email = 10 and Threshold = 20 does not seem healthy. I do not see that on a site i just checked. The Threshold was set to 10.
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
For the Name and Address (which I do see the same on a db i just checked) have Middle Name = 1 and Suffix = 1 for a Threshold of 15 seems pointless as they will never play a role in determining someone is a match will they?
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Demerit's and Mick's answers are incorrect for the (built-in) reserved rules - though it's definitely confusing!
If a RuleGroup has a value in the name
field, and that name corresponds to a filename in CRM/Dedupe/BAO/QueryBuilder, then the customized SQL in those files will be used. The existing entries in civicrm_rule
for those RuleGroups are holdovers from before that system existed, and editing them has no effect.
"Standard" dedupe rules with multiple criteria are very inefficient compared to handwritten SQL, which is why this is a valuable technique. You can create your own handwritten queries with hook_civicrm_dedupe, and the Veda dedupe extension has a number of excellent examples. Note that this extension doesn't work on modern Civi because of some of its other functions, but the dedupe rules can be ripped out into something else.
Finally - I learned just yesterday that the built-in handwritten dedupe rules seem to execute different SQL when comparing in Unsupervised/Supervised mode (a single contact) vs. General mode (find all dupes). While I haven't proved it, I suspect that if you're in the rare scenario of needing to optimize your unsupervised/supervised dedupes, creating a new class to extend CRM_Dedupe_BAO_QueryBuilder
is the way to go. I just posted org.agbu.optimizeddedupe to provide an example of this.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "605"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcivicrm.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f29155%2freserved-de-dupe-rules%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If you have access to the database type
SELECT * from civicrm_dedupe_rule r inner join civicrm_dedupe_rule_group rg on rg.id = r.dedupe_rule_group_id;
which will give you a table which isn't pretty but is mostly understandable.
Ah you're right. I'll update answer.
– Demerit
9 hours ago
Thanks that tells me what I need, so I have deleted my earlier comment on your previous version of the answer
– Mick Kahn
7 hours ago
add a comment |
If you have access to the database type
SELECT * from civicrm_dedupe_rule r inner join civicrm_dedupe_rule_group rg on rg.id = r.dedupe_rule_group_id;
which will give you a table which isn't pretty but is mostly understandable.
Ah you're right. I'll update answer.
– Demerit
9 hours ago
Thanks that tells me what I need, so I have deleted my earlier comment on your previous version of the answer
– Mick Kahn
7 hours ago
add a comment |
If you have access to the database type
SELECT * from civicrm_dedupe_rule r inner join civicrm_dedupe_rule_group rg on rg.id = r.dedupe_rule_group_id;
which will give you a table which isn't pretty but is mostly understandable.
If you have access to the database type
SELECT * from civicrm_dedupe_rule r inner join civicrm_dedupe_rule_group rg on rg.id = r.dedupe_rule_group_id;
which will give you a table which isn't pretty but is mostly understandable.
edited 9 hours ago
answered 10 hours ago
DemeritDemerit
4,0662621
4,0662621
Ah you're right. I'll update answer.
– Demerit
9 hours ago
Thanks that tells me what I need, so I have deleted my earlier comment on your previous version of the answer
– Mick Kahn
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Ah you're right. I'll update answer.
– Demerit
9 hours ago
Thanks that tells me what I need, so I have deleted my earlier comment on your previous version of the answer
– Mick Kahn
7 hours ago
Ah you're right. I'll update answer.
– Demerit
9 hours ago
Ah you're right. I'll update answer.
– Demerit
9 hours ago
Thanks that tells me what I need, so I have deleted my earlier comment on your previous version of the answer
– Mick Kahn
7 hours ago
Thanks that tells me what I need, so I have deleted my earlier comment on your previous version of the answer
– Mick Kahn
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Using Demerit's correct and useful answer above, here are the details in plain text of the three pre-configured rules that you can't see by the normal method, so may be of use to others:
Name and Email (reserved): Supervised: Individual
First Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Last Name: Length "null", Weight 7
Email: Length "null", Weight 10
Threshold 20
Email (reserved): Unsupervised: Individual
Email: Length "null", Weight 10
Threshold 20
Name and Address (reserved): General: Individual
First Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Last Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Street Address: Length "null", Weight 5
Middle Name: Length "null", Weight 1
Suffix: Length "null", Weight 1
Threshold: 15
Not blaming you at all but some of those look a bit nuts. Is it possible you mis-copied the Email Unsupervised? Having Email = 10 and Threshold = 20 does not seem healthy. I do not see that on a site i just checked. The Threshold was set to 10.
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
For the Name and Address (which I do see the same on a db i just checked) have Middle Name = 1 and Suffix = 1 for a Threshold of 15 seems pointless as they will never play a role in determining someone is a match will they?
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Using Demerit's correct and useful answer above, here are the details in plain text of the three pre-configured rules that you can't see by the normal method, so may be of use to others:
Name and Email (reserved): Supervised: Individual
First Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Last Name: Length "null", Weight 7
Email: Length "null", Weight 10
Threshold 20
Email (reserved): Unsupervised: Individual
Email: Length "null", Weight 10
Threshold 20
Name and Address (reserved): General: Individual
First Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Last Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Street Address: Length "null", Weight 5
Middle Name: Length "null", Weight 1
Suffix: Length "null", Weight 1
Threshold: 15
Not blaming you at all but some of those look a bit nuts. Is it possible you mis-copied the Email Unsupervised? Having Email = 10 and Threshold = 20 does not seem healthy. I do not see that on a site i just checked. The Threshold was set to 10.
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
For the Name and Address (which I do see the same on a db i just checked) have Middle Name = 1 and Suffix = 1 for a Threshold of 15 seems pointless as they will never play a role in determining someone is a match will they?
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Using Demerit's correct and useful answer above, here are the details in plain text of the three pre-configured rules that you can't see by the normal method, so may be of use to others:
Name and Email (reserved): Supervised: Individual
First Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Last Name: Length "null", Weight 7
Email: Length "null", Weight 10
Threshold 20
Email (reserved): Unsupervised: Individual
Email: Length "null", Weight 10
Threshold 20
Name and Address (reserved): General: Individual
First Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Last Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Street Address: Length "null", Weight 5
Middle Name: Length "null", Weight 1
Suffix: Length "null", Weight 1
Threshold: 15
Using Demerit's correct and useful answer above, here are the details in plain text of the three pre-configured rules that you can't see by the normal method, so may be of use to others:
Name and Email (reserved): Supervised: Individual
First Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Last Name: Length "null", Weight 7
Email: Length "null", Weight 10
Threshold 20
Email (reserved): Unsupervised: Individual
Email: Length "null", Weight 10
Threshold 20
Name and Address (reserved): General: Individual
First Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Last Name: Length "null", Weight 5
Street Address: Length "null", Weight 5
Middle Name: Length "null", Weight 1
Suffix: Length "null", Weight 1
Threshold: 15
answered 7 hours ago
Mick KahnMick Kahn
641216
641216
Not blaming you at all but some of those look a bit nuts. Is it possible you mis-copied the Email Unsupervised? Having Email = 10 and Threshold = 20 does not seem healthy. I do not see that on a site i just checked. The Threshold was set to 10.
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
For the Name and Address (which I do see the same on a db i just checked) have Middle Name = 1 and Suffix = 1 for a Threshold of 15 seems pointless as they will never play a role in determining someone is a match will they?
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Not blaming you at all but some of those look a bit nuts. Is it possible you mis-copied the Email Unsupervised? Having Email = 10 and Threshold = 20 does not seem healthy. I do not see that on a site i just checked. The Threshold was set to 10.
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
For the Name and Address (which I do see the same on a db i just checked) have Middle Name = 1 and Suffix = 1 for a Threshold of 15 seems pointless as they will never play a role in determining someone is a match will they?
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
Not blaming you at all but some of those look a bit nuts. Is it possible you mis-copied the Email Unsupervised? Having Email = 10 and Threshold = 20 does not seem healthy. I do not see that on a site i just checked. The Threshold was set to 10.
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
Not blaming you at all but some of those look a bit nuts. Is it possible you mis-copied the Email Unsupervised? Having Email = 10 and Threshold = 20 does not seem healthy. I do not see that on a site i just checked. The Threshold was set to 10.
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
For the Name and Address (which I do see the same on a db i just checked) have Middle Name = 1 and Suffix = 1 for a Threshold of 15 seems pointless as they will never play a role in determining someone is a match will they?
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
For the Name and Address (which I do see the same on a db i just checked) have Middle Name = 1 and Suffix = 1 for a Threshold of 15 seems pointless as they will never play a role in determining someone is a match will they?
– petednz - fuzion♦
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Demerit's and Mick's answers are incorrect for the (built-in) reserved rules - though it's definitely confusing!
If a RuleGroup has a value in the name
field, and that name corresponds to a filename in CRM/Dedupe/BAO/QueryBuilder, then the customized SQL in those files will be used. The existing entries in civicrm_rule
for those RuleGroups are holdovers from before that system existed, and editing them has no effect.
"Standard" dedupe rules with multiple criteria are very inefficient compared to handwritten SQL, which is why this is a valuable technique. You can create your own handwritten queries with hook_civicrm_dedupe, and the Veda dedupe extension has a number of excellent examples. Note that this extension doesn't work on modern Civi because of some of its other functions, but the dedupe rules can be ripped out into something else.
Finally - I learned just yesterday that the built-in handwritten dedupe rules seem to execute different SQL when comparing in Unsupervised/Supervised mode (a single contact) vs. General mode (find all dupes). While I haven't proved it, I suspect that if you're in the rare scenario of needing to optimize your unsupervised/supervised dedupes, creating a new class to extend CRM_Dedupe_BAO_QueryBuilder
is the way to go. I just posted org.agbu.optimizeddedupe to provide an example of this.
add a comment |
Demerit's and Mick's answers are incorrect for the (built-in) reserved rules - though it's definitely confusing!
If a RuleGroup has a value in the name
field, and that name corresponds to a filename in CRM/Dedupe/BAO/QueryBuilder, then the customized SQL in those files will be used. The existing entries in civicrm_rule
for those RuleGroups are holdovers from before that system existed, and editing them has no effect.
"Standard" dedupe rules with multiple criteria are very inefficient compared to handwritten SQL, which is why this is a valuable technique. You can create your own handwritten queries with hook_civicrm_dedupe, and the Veda dedupe extension has a number of excellent examples. Note that this extension doesn't work on modern Civi because of some of its other functions, but the dedupe rules can be ripped out into something else.
Finally - I learned just yesterday that the built-in handwritten dedupe rules seem to execute different SQL when comparing in Unsupervised/Supervised mode (a single contact) vs. General mode (find all dupes). While I haven't proved it, I suspect that if you're in the rare scenario of needing to optimize your unsupervised/supervised dedupes, creating a new class to extend CRM_Dedupe_BAO_QueryBuilder
is the way to go. I just posted org.agbu.optimizeddedupe to provide an example of this.
add a comment |
Demerit's and Mick's answers are incorrect for the (built-in) reserved rules - though it's definitely confusing!
If a RuleGroup has a value in the name
field, and that name corresponds to a filename in CRM/Dedupe/BAO/QueryBuilder, then the customized SQL in those files will be used. The existing entries in civicrm_rule
for those RuleGroups are holdovers from before that system existed, and editing them has no effect.
"Standard" dedupe rules with multiple criteria are very inefficient compared to handwritten SQL, which is why this is a valuable technique. You can create your own handwritten queries with hook_civicrm_dedupe, and the Veda dedupe extension has a number of excellent examples. Note that this extension doesn't work on modern Civi because of some of its other functions, but the dedupe rules can be ripped out into something else.
Finally - I learned just yesterday that the built-in handwritten dedupe rules seem to execute different SQL when comparing in Unsupervised/Supervised mode (a single contact) vs. General mode (find all dupes). While I haven't proved it, I suspect that if you're in the rare scenario of needing to optimize your unsupervised/supervised dedupes, creating a new class to extend CRM_Dedupe_BAO_QueryBuilder
is the way to go. I just posted org.agbu.optimizeddedupe to provide an example of this.
Demerit's and Mick's answers are incorrect for the (built-in) reserved rules - though it's definitely confusing!
If a RuleGroup has a value in the name
field, and that name corresponds to a filename in CRM/Dedupe/BAO/QueryBuilder, then the customized SQL in those files will be used. The existing entries in civicrm_rule
for those RuleGroups are holdovers from before that system existed, and editing them has no effect.
"Standard" dedupe rules with multiple criteria are very inefficient compared to handwritten SQL, which is why this is a valuable technique. You can create your own handwritten queries with hook_civicrm_dedupe, and the Veda dedupe extension has a number of excellent examples. Note that this extension doesn't work on modern Civi because of some of its other functions, but the dedupe rules can be ripped out into something else.
Finally - I learned just yesterday that the built-in handwritten dedupe rules seem to execute different SQL when comparing in Unsupervised/Supervised mode (a single contact) vs. General mode (find all dupes). While I haven't proved it, I suspect that if you're in the rare scenario of needing to optimize your unsupervised/supervised dedupes, creating a new class to extend CRM_Dedupe_BAO_QueryBuilder
is the way to go. I just posted org.agbu.optimizeddedupe to provide an example of this.
answered 1 hour ago
Jon G - Megaphone TechJon G - Megaphone Tech
27.4k11872
27.4k11872
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to CiviCRM Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcivicrm.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f29155%2freserved-de-dupe-rules%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown