Skip to Main Content
IBM Data and AI Ideas Portal for Customers

This portal is to open public enhancement requests against products and services offered by the IBM Data & AI organization. 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

Post ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted and upvote them if they matter to you,

  1. Post an idea

  2. Upvote ideas that matter most to you

  3. Get feedback from the IBM team to refine your idea

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.

IBM Employees should enter Ideas at

Status Submitted
Created by Guest
Created on Apr 2, 2024

Fix the Party Relationship Transactions

We’ve recently stubbed our toes on an inconsistency in the implementations of addPartyRelationShip()/getPartyRelationship()/updatePartyRelationship().

The CONTACTREL tables, as well as the transactions above, explicitly represent the relationships as directional – i.e. with an explicit ‘from’ and ‘to’. However, the above transactions appear to disregard which party is ‘from’ and which party is ‘to’. I think this is defensible on the get(), since – until you query – you have no notion of the relationships types recorded, and so can’t express the anticipated ‘from’ and ‘to’.

However, this is problematic for add() and update(). Say we take a social media example. I could record:

“Ron follows Jim on Instagram”/”Jim is followed by Ron on Instagram”

The reltype is “Follows on Instagram”. From = Ron, To = Jim.

Suppose Jim sees me following him. He checks out my Instagram and decides to follow me back.

If I try to call addPartyRelationship( From = Jim, To = Ron, Type = “Follows on Instagram”) MDM considers this a duplicate and fails the transaction. However, it’s not a duplicate. The direction is the reverse of the existing relationship

We recently encountered this on-boarding a new client profile data source, where among the notions represented are (partial) ownership relationships between companies – for example A owns a 15% stake in B, and B owns a 25% stake in A. MDM does not permit recording both relationships

Needed By Quarter