Skip to Main Content
Digital Business Automation Ideas

This is an IBM Automation portal for Digital Business Automation products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (

Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.

Please use the following category to raise ideas for these offerings for all environments (traditional on premises, containers, on cloud):
  • Cloud Pak for Business Automation - including Business Automation Studio and App Designer, Business Automation Insights

  • Business Automation Workflow (BAW) - including BAW, Business Process Manager, Workstream Services, Business Performance Center, Advanced Case Management

  • Content Services - FileNet Content Manager

  • Content Services - Content Manager OnDemand

  • Content Services - Daeja Virtual Viewer

  • Content Services - Navigator

  • Content Services - Content Collector for Email, Sharepoint, Files

  • Content Services - Content Collector for SAP

  • Content Services - Enterprise Records

  • Content Services - Content Manager (CM8)

  • Datacap

  • Automation Document Processing

  • Automation Decision Services (ADS)

  • Operational Decision Manager

  • Robotic Process Automation

  • Robotic Process Automation with Automation Anywhere

  • Blueworks Live

  • Business Automation Manager Open Edition

  • IBM Process Mining

Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM. - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Delivered
Created by Guest
Created on Aug 31, 2020

FTS Search and normal search should help each other and not have their own world

Today if you search with FTS only, then it will search only via the Full Text Search engine.

If you search via the search criteria (without using the FTS search), then the search will search through the metadata of CMOD

Now, the problem is, when you mix the 2 searches:

For example, I search for all documents between 2 dates, then I give a document type, and a customer number. This is done through the normal search of CMOD (no FTS). I might get something like 30-40 documents, instead of 100000 documents.

Now in these 30-40 documents, I know I want to see all documents referencing “IBM Switzerland”, which is amounts maybe for 3 or 4 documents. So, I add the FTS search to search for these terms “IBM Switzerland”.

The result TODAY is that you need to wait many seconds, even some minutes (until the timeout) until you get the answer.

If in the FTS Search field, I add the customer number, in addition to “IBM Switzerland”, then I get the answer in a matter of seconds, if not milliseconds.

In this example, we can see that you are already reducing the result with the normal search, you need to duplicate some metadata in the normal search, to add them in the FTS search.

No user wants to do that (I mean duplicates the same values in 2-3 fields). The user expects that in the 30-40 documents, and only in these ones, you do the FTS search. And the answer should be lightning fast.

That’s why the idea here, is really that the 2 searches work together in order to find the documents that the user wants in a timely manner.

The user should NOT need to learn that the 2 searches are separate and works completely separated from one another.

This will help CMOD to have a much better user experience.

How should it work?

Here are a few ideas, that I have in mind:

  1. every value put in the normal search, are automagically duplicated in the FTS search field, behind the scene, ONLY IF the FTS search field is filled by the user. From what I’ve heard when I’ve opened some FTS Ticket by IBM, then the FTS engine also store the indexes of the documents.

  2. Enhance the FTS Engine to accept to search on a subset of the documents, I mean if the normal search returns 30-40 documents, then in addition to the search from the FTS, you pass the documents found with the FTS, and then the FTS Engine does its magic only on those 30-40 documents.

Because our users were really not happy, we have implemented a workaround through a plugin in ICN (Content Navigator) to implement the solution 1). And now the users are happy, because they get a FAST answer.

The problem is that we can do it with ICN, but we cannot do it with the Windows Client, and some of our users are still not happy, but they are using a bit more ICN.

Idea priority High
  • Guest
    Nov 28, 2020

    Thanks a lot for this update!

    What Release / Fix Pack is it part from?

    When is it available for 10.1.0.x releases?

  • Admin
    NEIL Parrott
    Oct 7, 2020

    Will be considered as an enhancement

  • Guest
    Sep 10, 2020

    This is a common problem not only in CMOD but as well in FileNet Content Manager. The relational search and the fulltext search are running separately and could produce large candidate results before finally joining the 2 results into one which may reduce the final resultset dramatically. So if there is a way to recognise that in the formulated query a search argument exists in both indices (database and fulltext) then it should be linked automatically. If there is no hint then the statistics of the underlaying technologies could be used to predict whether a semi-join query could be optimized. It would be a great step forward to have here a better optimized query behaviour including a prediction of the cardinalities before just firing queries on each subsystem which are wasting a lot of resources and are generating huge candidate lists, which most of the candidates need to be thrown away.