What Data for This Category Looks Like
Data for this category primarily comes from existing system inventories, domestic software and hardware directories, test environments, and publicly available vendor materials. The update cycle follows individual project timelines or quarterly intervals. Daily delivered documents include adaptation inventories, compatibility test reports, migration plans, and defect logs. Common data fields include adapted software and hardware names, version information, test environment configurations, defect severity levels, repair status, and more. There is no fixed mandatory format; data must be organized to align with actual project migration requirements.
What Constraints These Characteristics Impose on Forms and Interactions
Data sources for this category are scattered, and update cycles adjust flexibly per project. This requires forms and interactions to support parallel multi-source data import and manual completion. Daily delivered document types are diverse, so forms must support associative upload of multiple types of attachments such as adaptation inventories and compatibility test reports. There is no unified mandatory format for data fields, so interactive controls must support dynamic addition and removal of custom entries to avoid restricting adaptation scenarios with fixed fields. Single-project data volume varies with the scale of software and hardware adaptation, so pagination and loading controls must adapt to different volumes of test cases and defect records, while retaining quick filter entry points.
The following configurations are explained based on the forms and interactions features of FastGPT v4.17.0.
How to Set Configurations
| Configuration Item | Recommended Approach | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
Form Input Node formInput | Test example: Select 3 fields from independent innovation replacement adaptation as required inputs; actual fields are determined per task | This node collects user input; missing required items must trigger interaction status checks to prevent subsequent nodes from failing to receive complete input |
User Select Node userSelect | Test example: Set 2 business options, check corresponding branches one by one | This node handles user selection; query and filtering of independent innovation replacement adaptation related records must be implemented by subsequent interfaces or external systems |
| Field Passing After Submission | Test example: Prepare 10 independent innovation replacement adaptation input samples, covering complete filling, missing required items, and cancellation operations | Compare input and node output to verify whether subsequent nodes receive corresponding fields; result thresholds are determined per actual task |
| External Implementation Item: Bulk Import Function | Must be implemented separately by external systems; implemented by external business systems or subsequent nodes | Adapt to bulk import requirements for existing system inventories and domestic software and hardware directories, reducing manual entry costs |
| External Implementation Item: Attachment Upload Restrictions | Must be implemented separately by external systems; configured by external business systems or subsequent nodes | Adapt to storage requirements for large-volume documents such as test reports and migration plans |
| External Implementation Item: Custom Field Configuration | Must be implemented separately by external systems; implemented by external business systems or subsequent nodes | Match the characteristics of project data with no fixed format, supporting flexible expansion of adaptation scenarios |
Three Common Mistakes
- Symptom: No corresponding options appear when selecting an AI model in the
userSelectnode configuration, but the published workflow can normally call the configured models. Cause: The model permission binding logic is implemented by external business systems or subsequent nodes; the FastGPT workflow publishing link inherits global model configuration by default. - Symptom: In a docker deployment environment, the voice input function of the test form cannot be used normally. This function is implemented by external business systems or third-party components, and the prompt still indicates missing dependencies after installing ffmpeg in the container. Cause: The docker container runs by default as a non-root user, unable to obtain audio collection permissions, and ffmpeg dependencies are not mounted to the correct running directory.
- Symptom: When the workflow is associated with a test case form, the output content of the previous node is brought into the final result. Cause: The output filtering logic is configured and implemented by external business systems or subsequent nodes; FastGPT transmits all input data collected by the form by default.
How to Confirm Proper Configuration
- Open the test case form, verify that basic fields include core information such as adaptation item names and version numbers, and confirm that the
formInputconfiguration is effective. - Try uploading documents such as adaptation inventories and test reports, check whether the attachment upload function works normally. This function is implemented by external business systems or third-party components, confirm that the upload limit configuration meets project requirements.
- Try adding custom fields, confirm that this function is implemented by external business systems or subsequent nodes, allowing flexible entry of additional adaptation information.
- After publishing the workflow, check whether the form's filter groups can be categorized by adaptation stage and defect severity. This configuration is implemented by external business systems or subsequent nodes, confirm that the filter configuration meets project requirements.
The values provided are common starting points and should be measured against the reader's own samples.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-10-19.