Hello
We have run into an issue where we are close to the max column limit on the Incident entity. We have used Case/Incident for many different workflows, and have a lot more development work in our backlog. The goal of our institution is to use Dynamics CRM for all customer related workflows and we have many departments/groups who wish to have their own set of workflows.
The question we find ourselves with, is whether to use an approach of Case Extension entities to extend the case entity. This seems to be quite effort intensive and a bit error prone. Basically the idea is we would create a custom entity to store only the extra case fields, then create a html web resource w/ associated JavaScript to pull it into the form on the Case entity. From there the JavaScript will override the submit to save both case and extension, and then pull back related records upon edit. In theory this would work fine, however we are talking about hundreds of fields, with different data types. The amount of custom code will be enormous.
The other option is to use a custom entity for each "group/department" - for example say HR had a bunch of forms and workflows they wanted, then Legal also had their items, and other departments. For each, we could create a set of fields, forms, process flows and such, but each group would be in a separate entity.
The pros to the first option are that all items are still a Case/Incident, making pulling them all together in advanced find or OOB reports possible. The main con though is the huge amount of custom HTML/JavaScript required (we have a lot of requests for new forms etc. and many can be quite complex with show/hide and such). The second option, we could be up and running quickly.
Which option is more commonly used, which option is more supported by Microsoft? Assuming we plan to upgrade to the newest version at some point, will either option be more or less of a problem in that situation?
any input is appreciated!
thank you
