Product Communities

I’m currently validating Adobe Analytics tags for a banking mobile app in the UAT environment. When I trigger certain events (tags), I can see the data firing correctly in the Adobe Analytics Debugger. However, the same data does not appear in Adobe Analytics Workspace. I’ve tested this across multiple devices and operating systems, but the issue persists. What’s puzzling is that when my colleague performs the same actions from her system (different device and setup), she is able to see the data in Workspace without any issues. It seems like the problem occurs only when I test it, despite not using the same device or environment as my colleague. I’m unsure what could be blocking the data visibility on my end. Has anyone encountered a similar scenario before? Any guidance or insights would be greatly appreciated.

In our Adobe Experience Manager internal portal(Azure OIDC auth 6.5 instance) the homepage invokes a few APIs that fetch data from a database and store user-specific responses in Redis.We normally conduct performance testing with 18,000 concurrent users (2 publishers with ~9,000 virtual users each) over a duration of 30 minutes. Prior to the upgrade, all API responses were consistently under 1 second.Recently, we upgraded to AEM 6.5 LTS (SP21) running on Java 21. After the upgrade, under the same load conditions, the average API response time has increased significantly to around 11 seconds.There are no functional issues observed, and all APIs are working as expected. However, this performance degradation is only noticeable during load testing.Has anyone encountered similar performance issues after upgrading to AEM 6.5 LTS SP21 or moving to Java 21? Any insights or areas to investigate would be helpful.

Hi everyone,I am currently building a Journey in Adobe Journey Optimizer (AJO) to handle some fragment testing, and I am running into an issue with profile capping across multiple segments.My Goal:I need to send live versions of an email to a client for QA/proofing. Because the email pulls dynamic live data via a Fragment, standard proofing won't suffice—I need real records to trigger the journey. I am trying to pull exactly 1 record per segment to send out these test emails.My Journey Setup: Initial Split: The journey uses an Optimize/Decision activity to split profiles into separate paths based on their segments (I have 10 segments in total). Profile Capping: On each segment's path, I have placed another activity using Profile Capping configured to limit the path to exactly 1 record (to capture a single QA sample for that segment). Fallback: If the cap is met, profiles are routed to a "Limit Reached" bucket. The Problem:When I run this, only 3 out of the 10 segments successfully

I had a question regarding reducing latency for data availability in Customer Journey Analytics (CJA).We understand that a latency of around 1–2 hours for data to become available in CJA is fairly normal. However, there is a requirement from the client side to have data available sooner, ideally within 15 minutes.One suggestion was to look into setting up a Streaming API to reduce the delay. From my understanding, the Edge Network to AEP/CJA setup already uses streaming ingestion, and based on Adobe’s SLA documentation, the processing time still appears to be within a similar timeframe.I’m aware that true real-time capabilities would require additional licensing/capabilities, which the client currently does not have. So my question is:With the existing AEP/CJA setup and licensing, are there any recommended approaches or best practices to reduce the latency and have data available sooner in CJA?Would appreciate any guidance from anyone who has worked on similar implementations.

We are trying to migrate our Snowflake authentication method to key/pair as recommended. We are following all necessary steps but still running into authentication error. Curious if anyone has done this lately and can share gotchas? 

Hi, I need to speak with an AEM cloud expert regarding a migration from on prem to cloud. Could you kindly get in touch with me. Thank you!. 

Dark mode has become a normal part of the email experience, which means marketers need to think about more than just how an email looks in the default inbox view.The tricky part is that dark mode does not behave the same way across email clients. Some inboxes support custom dark mode styling, some apply their own automatic treatment, and some ignore custom settings altogether. That can make testing feel inconsistent unless you know what to expect.With the new Email Designer in Marketo Engage, you can now do more to prepare for dark mode. Marketo lets you:preview dark mode behavior define custom dark mode styling for supported clients adjust text, background, and button colors swap in alternate assets when needed test rendering across clients with Litmus integrationThat said, it’s important to set expectations correctly: Marketo Engage cannot control how every email client ultimately renders your message.Once the email reaches the inbox, the email client still has the final say. That’s

Hi guys, Could you help me understand how AJO uses seed lists for event based (on edge) journeys?  Scenario:I have an abandon browse event captures ‘on the edge’ events triggered through our websdk.This event is being used to initiate a complex journey within AJO to ultimately send emails to eligible customer who trigger the event.I have set the email templates using a channel configuration that contains seeds. Question:I want to understand how AJO will handle the seed list.Will it send a seed every time a customer triggers the event and an email is sent (which would be thousands a day).Will it only send a seed the first time an event flows through to the email nodes - for the entire life of the journey. Or something else? Reason:I want to customise how seeds are sent. For example some of the seeds are internal teams who want to check the emails occasionally, some are for our validity email performance therefore have limited credits.I also want to avoid having to include manual configu

We are wanting to bring our proofreading process into Workfront, but are struggling to find the easiest way to do so.Our proofreaders don’t work on specific work as it’s based on what’s coming in and how busy each of them are. Our current way is outside of Workfront, where they pick up the PDF and proofread that file to give back to the team to make edits. We would like to include them in the proofing process that happens within Workfront currently. Since there isn’t a way to pull a report to show what a person has to review (as we don’t need them to approve the proof), we are finding that the only way to add them into the Workfront Proofing process is to add both proofreaders as reviewers & approvers. The owner of the proof would then remove the proofreader who doesn’t make a decision on the proof since the other one did the work. We can use the reports that we have built for them to see what work they have and show them how they can see if the other one is in the proof or not.Doe

Hi Community, we are ingesting customer profile data into AEP via batch ingestion into a profile-enabled dataset. The batch runs show as successful in Monitoring and the data is visible in the dataset preview. However the Real-Time Customer Profile is not reflecting the updated attributes and our segment membership is not updating even after 24 hours. Identity stitching is configured with ECID as primary identity. We verified the dataset is profile-enabled and the schema has the correct union schema. Batch status shows as Success with no failed records. What could cause profile not to update even when batch ingestion succeeds?

Hello, I am encountering the error code highlighted in the title of this request when i am trying to publishing version 2 of one of my customer journeys. The Customer Journey in question starts with a Read Audience activity and is comprised of:2 Email Actions 1 Recall Custom ActionThis is the design: This is the full error log:{  "error": [    {      "error": "{\"code\":3000,\"family\":\"SYSTEM_ERROR\",\"message\":\"Inline messages publication has failed\",\"service\":\"vyg-authoring-api\",\"version\":\"4b9b303\",\"context\":\"com.adobe.voyager.service.authoring.restapis.v1_0.JourneyVersionsService:5539\",\"uid\":\"40a20b74-38fc-4070-9198-12397ea600c0\",\"extraInfo\":{\"validationStatus\":\"error\",\"reason\":\"1 error is currently blocking the publication\",\"errors\":[{\"errorCode\":\"ERR_AUTHORING_JOURNEYVERSION_110\",\"error\":\"Can't bulk publish inline campaigns in journey version '40a20b74-38fc-4070-9198-12397ea600c0'.\",\"additionalDetails\":{\"args\":[\"40a20b74-38fc-4070-9198

Why 4 is correct not 1?  

Hi Smart Brains, I am trying to solve a validation problem here. On the typehead field for choosing campaigns, I want to add a validation to select campaign only created using a particular template. Else I would like to display a message saying this is not the correct type of campaign. Any hints how does that work? Thanks,Nisha

Hi,I’ve missed the last 2 Adobe Target Engineering Webinar’s (#4 and #5). Were these recorded and if so would it be possible to share the links please? 

With network maintenance coming up on one Marketo pod, I was asked whether any features wouldn’t be affected during the maintenance period. First instinct: Nope. Everything uses the network, after all: outbound sends, SFDC sync, inbound LPs and forms, API calls and webhooks, etc. But one feature was unclear: unsubscribes driven by the List-Unsubscribe-Post SMTP header. Don’t think anyone looked into this before (like, anywhere). As you probably know, MAPs like Marketo comply with major email providers’ List-Unsubscribe requirement for optimal inboxing. They include a List-Unsubscribe-Post=One-Click header, plus a List-Unsubscribe header with a unique <https:> URL. Optionally, the old-school <mailto:> URL can also be included. Here’s an example:List-Unsubscribe-Post: List-Unsubscribe=One-ClickList-Unsubscribe: <https://click.example.com/u/NDEwLVhPUi02NzMAAAGhsh1UUD4gY6H_B7Njx0Jc6yQJgFRnh79OM35fojpoyZioqvs37SuRJd8HZ1U99J58MdA5RZg=?emailAddress=NDEwLVhPUi02NzMAAAGhsh1UT80Ef

The SFDC Activity Metric ID and Activity Metric Rollup ID fields are read-only, maintained by Einstein Activity Capture, and their permissions can’t be changed.  These fields are not needed by Marketo.  Is there another way to prevent them from syncing to Marketo?

Our users are reporting broken functionality inside Workfront’s ProofHQ tools. It also appears the UI has changed slightly, so we suspect there may have been some sort of recent release? I couldn’t find anything conclusive in the release log.  Please see screenshot below for a detailed report, but essentially the text selection tools are no longer populating text, line breaks aren’t being respected, and the “edit” button erases all content. We’ve also had users unable to save copy/pasted text.  Insights are much appreciated. Thanks!   

Hi all, I have created two activities with two different location names for the android app. the activity with the location name bottom-sheet-mbox-fragement is delivering as expected, but the activity with the location name target-global-mbox is not delivering. has anyone faced this scenario before?

Hello :)I'm trying to find this object in layout templates to turn it off - approvals tab in documents. I was able to find and hide the approvals tab in all other objects but can't find this one. I can't find document in this list to edit the side panel the way I did for the others. What am I missing? 

Can a validation rule be setup that only allows users from a particular group to access a form field?  I’m trying something along these lines but I can’t get the syntax correct.IF($$USER.groupIDs="69fcf9d70002183a0944fbb90b78a5ab", "Only members of the LP Approval group can edit this field.")Any help would be appreciated.ThanksFrank