Skip to Main Content
IBM Sterling

This portal is to open public enhancement requests for IBM Sterling products and services. 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.

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 Future consideration
Created by Guest
Created on Sep 8, 2021

getOrderList API should provide one unioned, sorted result set across active and history records

Today's implementation of getOrderList API makes two calls under the hood - one to archive tables and one to active tables (assuming archive switch was invoked in the call.)

Almost *no* consumer of order history wants two separate lists, each sorted with its own history. Rather, the consuming application typically wants one cohesive time-ordered list of orders, especially from an Order Management system of record. How the data is stored and retrieved in the underlying should be of no concern to the consuming application(s), and the ramifications of the underlying design should be masked for the consumer. The serving application should take the onus to union THEN sort the result set, rather than requiring comparable functions in each and every consuming system.

Presumably, this behavior was designed with an assumption that archive records are inherently older that active records. This is not always true. As a multi-brand retailer, with staggered onboarding of brands to OMS, it is entirely possible to have a single customer with migrated (archived) records which are newer than one or more of the active records received for another brand. The net result to the customer is a brand-diminishing, improperly sorted order history (Several customers have already called this out.)

There is also a behavior in Call Center which moves order records from archived to active upon search and view, even when no modifications are made, which further exacerbates the issue.

What is your industry? Retail
How will this idea be used?

Order history (getOrderList) is used to drive the My Account section of each of our website properties, and our telephone-based self-serve order status system at the Call Center.