Coverflow sorting issues

Bear with me on this one....I have an extensive Itune library mostly sorted in albums listing. Just upgraded to a 80gb Classic which obviously has Coverflow. Noted that when looking through Artist lists some artistes which I knew I had loaded were not there but did appear in Coverflow.....at end of the list after XYZ....established that what had hapened was that when I had originally burnt the CD to Itunes I had the 'compilations box' ticked and these were the albums that had found their way out of sequence....OK. Today I decided that to get it organised I would move the 'said' albums to their respective Artist folders in my Itunes folder and then make sure that Itunes could find the tracks.....done that and then cleaned off ipod, and reloaded...guess what.....no change. Can someone throw some light no this as I was convincved that my 'tinkering' today would sort it out

Did you unset the Compilations flag before/after moving the files around? The organisation of tracks in iTunes & on the iPod is not related to the location of the phyisical files.
*HowTo: Grouping Tracks Into Albums*
Excuse the long post, but hopefully covering all the bases (that I can think of) will help you fix the other issues you are likely to run into as you try to organise your iTunes library.
*Use an album friendly view*
iTunes will let you sort music on many columns, some of which are unlikely to group albums together or put the tracks in their normal order. The most useful order for editing the library is probably *Album by Artist*. If you're not already there, select the list view and click on the column heading for Artist until it reads Album by Artist.
*One cover, too many tracks*
The iPod (and iTunes to a lesser extent) conflates two or more albums with the same title, most obviously with *Greatest Hits*. On the iPod this can result in one album acting as a combination of two or more. Selecting any cover gives all the tracks of all albums with the same title. The workaround for this "Greatest Hits" bug is to give each album a unique title - I tend to go for *Album - Album Artist* as this reads clearly in the iTunes browser. Alternatively you could use the wording as it appears on the cover or append different numbers of spaces for each different album. Somewhat oddly, setting different values for Sort Album doesn't work.
*Album not with others by same artist*
iTunes relies on the Gracenote CDDB database when identifying CD's. This often marks collections or anthologies of an artist's work as a compilation. In iTunes, however, the compilation flag has the logical function of grouping together tracks with the same album name, but different artists on each track, e.g. "Now That's What I Call Metal 666!". These compilations are then all grouped together at the end of cover flow. Most of us however, would expect "Greatest Hits" albums to be listed with the other albums by the same album artist. For albums which are essentially by a single album artist or group it is best to set the appropriate value for the album artist and clear the compilation flag.
*One album, too many covers*
For true compilations, where each track is by a different artist, the answer is to set the compilation flag to true and enable the iTunes preference to *Group compilations when browsing*. Otherwise tracks which list guest artists will be treated as separate items. Filling in the Album Artist field is enough to link things in iTunes. Sadly, however, the iPod ignores the Album Artist field when grouping albums so this is only a partial solution. You can simply mark the entire album as a compilation which seems to be the way iTMS handles it, however that's not an ideal fix. Short of waiting for Apple to address this issue (and as far as I can tell it goes back to the 1st gen. of iPods) we need a workaround. What I do is to put any additional artist info. in square brackets after the song name. E.g. *Track \[Feat. Guest\]* and then set *Artist=Album Artist* for each track. For anthologies where the Album Artist is credited as part of another group, e.g. for Cream tracks on an Eric Clapton anthology, I use *Track \[As Group\]*. For a track where the main Album Artist doesn't receive a credit, e.g. the first track of the Slim Shady LP credited to Jeff Bass, I just set the track name to *Track \[Guest\]* while still setting the artist to the album artist. N.b. I use square brackets to indicate this is not part of the actual song title and also use this style for Mix/Live/Bonus info.
*One album, still too many covers*
iTunes may split albums into two or more sections if some tracks from the album have different values for Artist, Album Artist, Album, No. of Discs or Part of a Compilation. Tiny differences such as trailing spaces, accented characters or variants of symbols can sometimes be quite hard to spot. The iPod is also more sensitive to case variations and may split or reorder an album that looks okay in iTunes. Normally overtyping the desired value for each shared field will complete the grouping of the album into one entity. Occasionally, however, this method seems to fail. When this happens I've found that you can force every field to update properly by adding some extra text - e.g. a trailing X, which once applied seems to complete the joining of the tracks into one album. Once this has happened the extra data can be removed and the album should remain properly grouped.
*Tried that, there are STILL too many covers!*
The Sort Artist, Sort Album & Sort Album Artist fields can be used to override the normal sort order. For example iTunes automatically drops leading articles (a/an/the) so "The Beatles" are arranged under "B" instead of "T". Occasionally different tracks from the same album can have different values in these sort fields which can also break up the grouping. Making the sort columns visible in iTunes can help with spotting & correcting such problems.
*One cover for multi-disc album*
Multi-disc albums are often listed as *Album (CD1)* for CD 1, *Album (CD2)* for CD 2 etc. To display these properly using just one cover, each disc should have the correct *Disc X of Y* values set, and then the entire album should be given the single title Album. Being somewhat obsessive I also renumber the tracks sequentially, working backwards from the last track (so that no two tracks ever have the same number) until I reach disc 1. BTW You can still give the individual discs different artwork should it be relevant so that the correct artwork will be displayed as the album progresses.
*One artist, many names*
With some artists, particularly classical composers, you should be aware of alternative representations of their names. E.g. 2Pac vs. Tupac. The menus will work best if for each artist you standardise on just one form of their name. E.g. make a choice between Mozart, W.A. Mozart or Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, and then apply it consistently. For classical music I tend also to use the Composer as the Artist & Album Artist and either discard the performer details or place these into the Comments field.
tt2

Similar Messages

  • 160Gb iPod Classic - Coverflow Sort order

    I have posted a similar forum topic on iLounge and I am really surprised at the lack of response and given that this issue may/must affect the iPhone and Touch that more people are not discussing it.
    My problem is this, I have purchased a 160Gb Classic and have found no way to replicate in iTunes the sort order that Coverflow uses within the iPod.
    Some have said that that the iPod coverflow sort order is Album by Artist (separating compilations) but using this method of sorting the coverflow within iTunes although comes close does not replicate what the iPod is doing with it's sorting of coverflow.
    So.
    Can anyone tell me if anyone / Apple have produced some documentation on how they currently and plan to expose tagging with iPods? I don't mind re-tagging my tracks again if necessary but want to be sure that I am not wasting my time.
    Do Apple intend to allow Coverflow to have the sort basis used by Coverflow to be chosen within the iPod? The 'Album Artist' tag would make more sense to me than the current method being used.
    The greatest strength that the iPod and iTunes has in my opinion is the ability to sort very large databases of music and allow singular tracks to be found quickly, the issue described above with Coverflow does not mean the end of the world but is concerning that Apple have allowed what appears to be a flawed product and methodology through their usually very high standards.

    In iTunes the coverflow view can be reordered by selecting a column heading to sort by - there is no ONE coverflow order. The iPod coverflow view corresponds to the ordering Album by Artist in ascending mode. In addition, the various versions of the firmware up to V1.03 fail to correctly gather albums via the Album Artist field although iTunes does. This can cause duplicate albums to appear when one principal artist has more than one album and some of the tracks feature guest artists. This behaviour can currently be corrected by setting the Sort Artist field in affected tracks to the value of the album's Artist. Hopefully a future firware update will correfct this. Another minor glitch is that the album will be credited to the artists that feature on the first track rather than the Album Artist. (V1.03 corrects this for Compilations only.)
    Another bug/feature means that where the same album title is used by more than one artist, both albums will feature all the tracks from both albums and the wrong artwork may be displayed. This also happens in iTunes. The workaround is to give each album a unique title by, for example, appending or prepending the name of the artist.
    tt2

  • Sorting issue after upgrade from 9i to 10g

    Dear all,
    It is found that the sorting behavior is different after upgrade from 9i to 10g.
    In 9i, even if the SQL statement does not specify the ORDER BY clause, the sorting order is consistent for a particular SQL statement and most likely the sequence follows the searched key fields' order.
    After upgrade to 10g, the query output could vary as long as the SQL statement does not specify the ORDER BY clause.
    Is it due to the Reverse Docid Sorting issue? How can I troubleshoot this issue?
    Thanks for your help,
    M.T.

    903714 wrote:
    Dear all,
    It is found that the sorting behavior is different after upgrade from 9i to 10g.
    In 9i, even if the SQL statement does not specify the ORDER BY clause, the sorting order is consistent for a particular SQL statement and most likely the sequence follows the searched key fields' order.
    After upgrade to 10g, the query output could vary as long as the SQL statement does not specify the ORDER BY clause.
    Is it due to the Reverse Docid Sorting issue? How can I troubleshoot this issue?
    Thanks for your help,
    M.T. This is expected behavior in 10g. Oracle will not order the dataset for you unless and until you explicitly specify it.
    So without using order by clause in 10g, oracle doesn't guarantee that rows will be ordered.
    To go back to old behavior like 9i, you can set a workaround by
    alter session set "_newsort_enabled"=false;
    Also see MOS - Order Of Data Retrieval Differs after upgrading 9i To 10g [ID 456707.1]

  • Query as a web service Sorting issue

    Hi All,
    We have designed an existing BI query as a web service but it seems to be ignoring the Sort order of different characteristics used (as defined in Bex Query Designer).
    Using the Context menu in QAAS and defining/managing the Sort is not working.
    Has anyone experienced such an issue and how to handle this?
    Thanks and Regards,
    Bansi

    Hi All,
    You can try this solution. It has something to do with the universe parameter, END_SQL.
    I implemented this as a work around and it solved our problem about the sorting issue with QAAWS.
    Here are the steps:
    1: Open the universe
    2. Ope File,  then Universe Parameter
    3. Click the parameter tab
    4. Scroll down until you see the 'END_SQL' entry. This entry is blank by default.
    5. Select END_SQL
    6. On the VALUE box, type: ORDER BY 1
    7. This will enable the REPLACE button. Click REPLACE
    8. Save the universe
    9 Test a query using 2 columns and view the SQL.
    You should see now the ORDER BY 1 inferred in the SQL statement.
    Voila!!!!
    Of course you can always add ORDER By 1,2,3 later if there's a need.
    Enjoy.....
    Ferdinand

  • Finder sort issue

    I seem to be having a sorting issue.
    This order seems odd to me, but like to get your opinions about it.
    (This folder is sorted alphabetically by file name.)
    2008 01.doc
    2008 02.doc
    Activiteit_oktober.doc
    af 200802 - groen reserve.rtf
    af 200802 - groen.rtf
    af 20071130 - groen-geel.doc
    af 20080126 - groen.rtf
    af 20080216 avond - leiding WE.pages
    af 20080704 avond - groen & oranje.pages
    af 20080709 avond - bezinning.rtf
    idee spel.rtf
    In my logic the file 'af 20071130 - groen-geel.doc' should be before the two files beginning with 'af 200802' and not after. Or is this just me?

    In my logic the file 'af 20071130 - groen-geel.doc' should be before the two files beginning with 'af 200802' and not after. Or is this just me?
    OS X Finder sorts strings of digits according to their value, not digit by digit. 200802 is less than 20071130. Here is a note on the issue:
    http://homepage.mac.com/thgewecke/sorting.html

  • Front Row sorting issues

    Hello,
    I know this issue has been posted several times and without any real solutions. But I'm going to ask again anyway in case the magical hacking gnomes have found a work-around.
    I have many sorting issues. There seems to be a lot of kvetching on here already about how Front Row sorts TV shows. But not only do my shows come up backwards within seasons, in some cases seasons themselves are out of order. For example, I have all 3 seasons of 30 Rock (purchased through iTMS) and they go season 1, season 3, season 2. Several other shows with multiple seasons are the same.
    But I also have a music sorting issue. The first part of this issue has to do with compilations. I've got several compilations in my library, and in iTunes I've sorted them by Various Artists rather than individual artists. In Front Row, if I scroll down to "V," there is no "Various Artists" like you might expect but instead a list of all the artists in all the compilations completely out of order. (Actually, they're ordered by their track number on the different albums. Yeah. That makes sense.) I could deal with these artists showing up in their normal places alphabetically, but not all lumped together under V.
    The other issue has to do with albums with one artist who has some tracks that feature other artists. Kanye West's "Graduation" is a good example. About half the tracks on the album are him "featuring Jamie Foxx," for example. So I put "Kanye West" in the sort field of this album so it displays properly in iTunes. Not only does this seem to have no effect on how things are sorted in Front Row, but there's actually multiple "Kanye West"s now, each one identical, as well as multiple "Kanye West feat. Jamie Foxx," lines and all the other multiple artist track. Uh...what?
    So I know that Front Row for some ridiculous reason is (a) not customizable and (b) operates under completely different sorting rules than iTunes (which makes no sense), but if anyone has any advice or tips or comments or whatever, that would be greatly appreciated.
    I've considered switching to a different media management program, but what I like about Front Row is its simplicity. I don't really feel like learning a whole new system (let alone getting my wife to buy into that idea). I've got better ways to spend my time. So, it's a trade off, I guess.
    Anyway, Apple Gods? Are you out there? Are you listening?

    I can't believe we're still banging on about the sorting problems. Apple have seen fit to provide a number of features to allow the user to get iTunes working the way they like, e.g. grouping compilation artists and the use of sort fields. I think you can now even keep compilation artists grouped on the iPod. But why oh why do they then totally ignore this for the AppleTV and Front Row (which look like the same codebase to me)?
    I have hundreds of genuine Artists that I want to see listed in the Artists' list, but not the thousands of others that appear on compilations. They don't even sort the artists by the Artist Sort field that they themselves provide in iTunes. This makes a nonsense of trying to use either the ATV or Front Row.
    Playlists are no help as they simply lump all contained tracks in one great list. Useless.
    The annoying thing is, they can get it right. iTunes just gets better and better in this regard, each release sorting out more of the omissions of earlier versions. But ATV and Front Row - nope, nothing. Still just as stupid as always. Just what will it take to convince Apple to 'sort' (ha) this out? How can they justify such entirely different ways of working on their different products?

  • Help! Cover art sorting issue!! Please help!!!!

    Thanks in advance!
    I have tried, and tried. And for the life of me, I cannot get coverflow to display the Artist, then the albums of that artist in the order they came out in.
    I searched the forums, and web, and one solution I found said to label each according album sequentially manually. = ( This would take days! LOL...
    Any help would be greatly appreciated!
    Again, I would like cover flow to sort by the Artist first alphabetically of course, but the albums displayed by the artist I would like in the order they were released. I have tried sorting by artist, album artist, year, grouping, etc.. every option to no avail! It seems it is one choice or the other. = (
    It is indeed a pain in the neck. I just installed V.8.0, the new "standard" view lists artists in this fashion, why can't cover flow? Am I missing something? Again, any insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

    As far as I know, what you are asking for can not be done in the iTunes library window.
    I've gotten around this by creating Smart Playlists for the few artists this matters most for me. The Smart Playlist finds all tracks by a certain artist then I simply drag the albums into the order they were released.
    The only way I can think of to do this for your entire library would be to rename each album with it's year of release preceding it's name. That's a project I'd avoid like the plague since I have over 10,000 tracks in iTunes.

  • Cover flow and album sort issues

    I just got a 80GB iPod classic for Christmas and I have noticed some annoying differences between iTunes cover flow and iPod cover flow:
    1. In iTunes cover flow, when you have songs with "Unknown Album", they clutter up the cover flow for each artist. In iPod cover flow, they are sent to the back of the cover flow in a nice little "Various Artists" cover. I like how this works on the iPod better.
    2. iTunes cover flow sorts by album artist, so you don't see a separate album for each non-album artist song.
    For example: If I set my album artist for the Saturday Night Fever soundtrack to "Saturday Night Fever" (don't ask why, this is how i like it sorted) then I will only see one "Saturday Night Fever" rather than one for Bee Gees, one for Kool & the Gang, etc.
    iPod cover flow sorts by artist, so you see a separate album for each non-album artist song. I like the way this works in iTunes better.
    3. When sorting by "Album by Year" in iTunes, syncing the iPod doesn't seem to follow the same sorting. Albums are still sorted on the iPod alphabetically. I want them to sort by year on my iPod.
    So I would appreciate it if someone could help me with all 3 of these issues. As you can see, sometimes iTunes is better for me, sometimes iPod is better for me.

    3. Playlists should be sorted in the same way as they are in iTunes. The Cover Flow order is fixed.
    This is not the case, at least not with iTunes 7.5.0.20 and my 80GB Classic running 1.0.3 on it (current version as of this writing). In iTunes, under LIBRARY, I select Music, and I have my music sorted via *Album by Year*. This works perfectly in iTunes. I'll use my Soundgarden library as an example, as it shows the problem nicely.
    *_iTunes order_:*
    Ultramega OK
    Louder Than Love
    Screaming Life/Fopp
    Badmotorfinger
    Superunknown
    Songs From The Superunknown
    Down on the Upside
    A-Sides
    That's ordered by date and is perfect. +Ultramega OK+ was released way back in 1988, while A-Sides was released nearly 10 years later in 1997. In Cover Flow View it works great. However, in the iPod it's sorted alphabetically, which is completely wrong:
    *_iPod Classic_:*
    A-Sides
    Badmotorfinger
    Down on the Upside
    Louder Than Love
    Screaming Life/Fopp
    Songs From The Superunknown
    Superunknown
    Ultramega OK
    This is totally wrong. And I haven't yet found a way to force it.
    Apple, please, this shouldn't be that difficult.

  • Payment Advice Sort Issue

    Hi All,
      We are having an issue with the way the payment advices are sorted for our canadian company when running DME. We set a sort variant based on Payee name on REGUH which is ZNME1, but that field has <b>Firstname Lastname</b> so all the sort is done based on first name. We want to do it based on last name but there no field on REGUH which will help us.
    Kindly advice.
    Regards,
    S

    Hi Javed
    Please let me know if you have implemented any solution to this. We are facing the same issue.
    Regards
    Rajesh

  • Index (HHK) sorting issue in Japanese (RoboHelp X3)

    I'm a Japanese localizing engineer who now tries to generate
    a WebHelp with a nicely sorted index in Japanese.
    As I assume that this has been a known issue for double-byte
    languages for a long time, a Japanese index cannot be sorted
    perfectly in a compiled chm or WebHelp. In Japanese, there are
    several types of Japanese characters (Kanji, Katakana, Hiragana).
    Regardless of what type of character a string is typed in, Japanese
    strings should be sorted according to <i>yomi-gana</i>,
    the way each Japanese string pronounces but currently an index gets
    sorted according to the following order (in ASCII code):
    *number
    *alphabet
    *hiragana
    *katanaka
    *kanji... and so on.
    So here I'm trying to do the followings:
    1. In a HHK file, I put <so>...</so> in front of
    every entry where I spell out the pronounciation in each <so>
    segment.
    2. Open the HHK with HTML Workshop, sort the file, and save
    it (I'll get the file sorted according to what I have put in
    <so>..</so>.
    3. Open it with a Text Editor and remove all the
    <so>..</so> entrires.
    4. Put the HHK file in a build folder and generate a
    chm/WebHelp in RoboHelp X3.
    In the 4th step, I don't want RoboHelp to re-sort the HHK but
    it does it automatically. If I can disable the index sorting
    functionality in RoboHelp X3 (the latest version in Japanese) but
    looks like there is no way to do it. If anyone is sure that it's
    not possible to disable the auto-sorting functionality in RoboHelp,
    please let me know so that I can give up witout a sweat.
    By the way, I have tried the alternative for WebHelp that
    skips the 3rd step and removes all the <so>...</so> in
    the files that RoboHelp creates. The result is that everything got
    messed up and some of the contents in the Index couldn't be viewed
    in a browser.
    Thanks.
    Rota.

    Hi Paul
    Have you tried just right-clicking in the index and choosing sort?
    Click the image below to view larger.
    Note that this may require you to temporarily configure Microsoft HTML Help as the primary layout and editing the Project Settings in order to allow the sort function to appear.
    Remember, you press Ctrl+Shift+? to open Project Settings. You then would turn off (or ensure it's turned off) the Binary Index feature.
    Once you have done this, you would then revert any settings that you changed to allow things to work.
    Cheers... Rick
    Helpful and Handy Links
    RoboHelp Wish Form/Bug Reporting Form
    Begin learning RoboHelp HTML 7 or 8 within the day - $24.95!
    Adobe Certified RoboHelp HTML Training
    SorcerStone Blog
    RoboHelp eBooks

  • Possible resolution to sorting issue in iTunes 9 and 3.1

    For those experiencing issues sorting Podcasts chronologically:
    One particular daily podcast I subscribe to was not sorting correctly (was in random order on the iPod Touch 32gb 2nd Gen).
    I did notice the "Release Date" wasn't carrying over to the iPod during the syncing process.
    (If you try this, copy any podcasts you can't afford to lose to a separate directory)
    1) I unsubscribed from the podcast in iTunes 9
    2) deleted all the episodes from iTunes
    3) Synced iTunes / iPod - (basically removing remnants of the podcast)
    4) Went back to the iTunes store and subscribed again to said podcast
    5) "Get" the episodes I wanted
    6) Synced iTunes and iTouch
    Thankfully, this corrected the issue of random sort order on my iPod - now the "Release Date" is again noted / visible when looking in the iPod and it is ordered correctly.
    Hope this provides some relief to some.

    I had this happen with my 3GS almost a month ago. No amount of trying to restore would work and the Apple Genius claimed he had never seen anything like it.
    My iPhone was bricked with the error 23. I plugged it into XCode and it failed to restore saying there was a radio failure. There was no 3G, no WiFi no edge and no bluetooth. They were all grayed out in settings. Apple replaced my phone with no problem. This is what you will end up having to do as well.
    You will be able to restore from your previous backup.

  • Mobile Me gallery sorting issue

    I recently upgraded iLife from '08 to '09. I am having an issue when I publish and event to my Mobile Me Gallery where its not sorting the photos correctly in the gallery. They don't seem to sorted the same way as I have them in the event when I publish them to the mobile me gallery, its not doing it every time just sometimes. I know I can go into the published gallery within iPhoto and go to view > sort and change it in there but it seems strange that I would have to do that. Why wouldn't it publish the same way as I have them sorted in the event. It also seems that sometimes when I do resort them in the gallery that it doesn't stay. Also is there a way to set the default setting to sort a certain way? Thanks.
    Message was edited by: johncocci

    I am having similar problems, also in reordering multiple galleries in iPhoto.
    try leaving feedback for Apple at http://www.apple.com/feedback/iphoto.html to make them aware of the issues. Maybe they will fix this in a future update. it did work in iPhoto '08 after all.

  • XQuery sorting issue

    Hi,
    Right now I am in a big trouble. I am new in XQuery, but right now I'm in a project using Xquery using PHP and XSLT..
    In our project we have large no. data (its a property listing site) and I'm storing that data to Berkeley DB (XML DB). The problem is when I am searching for a property its taking too much time for getting the result. The ORDER BY is creating the problem(Query 1).. with out sorting its working fine(Query 2). But for my project sorting is needed and its very impotent. So kindly please check my query(Query1) and please give me a solution as soon as possible. Following are the query:
    Query1:
    let $properties := (
    for $property in collection('bdb/properties.dbxml')/properties/property
    [( sale_price >=60000 and sale_price <=500000 ) and ( building_square_footage >=300 and building_square_footage <=3000 ) and ( bedrooms >=2 and bedrooms <=6 )]
    order by
    contains($property/mls_agent_id/text(), '505199') descending,
    matches($property/mls_office_id/text(), '^CBRR') ascending,
    $property/sale_price/number() descending
    return $property
    let $properties := subsequence($properties,10,10) return <properties>{$properties}</properties>
    Query 2:
    let $properties := (
    for $property in subsequence (
    collection('bdb/properties.dbxml')/properties/property
    [( sale_price >=60000 and sale_price <=500000 ) and ( building_square_footage >=300 and building_square_footage <=3000 ) and ( bedrooms >=2 and bedrooms <=6 )]
    , 1, 10)
    descending return $property
    ) return <properties>{$properties}</properties>
    Thank you,
    Vijesh
    Edited by: 893736 on Oct 28, 2011 10:28 AM
    Edited by: 893736 on Oct 28, 2011 10:33 AM

    Hi,
    Thank you for your reply.. right now there is a slight improvement in Query. But still i'm stucked with issue... also this project is also stucked...
    Now the problem is when I am searching for a property it will list the first 10 property quickly(100% speed). Then I'm going to 2dn, 3rd page its working in the same speed. But if I'm going to 10th(30% speed) or 100th or 1500th(15%speed) page is working very slowly.
    Following are my query:
    let $property_ids:=
    for $property in collection('bdb/properties.dbxml')/properties/property
    order by $property/sale_price/number() descending
    return $property/@property_id,
    for $property in collection('bdb/properties.dbxml')/properties/property
    order by $property/sale_price/number() descending
    return $property/@property_id,
    for $property in collection('bdb/properties.dbxml')/properties/property
    order by $property/sale_price/number() descending
    return $property/@property_id
    return <properties>{
    for $id in subsequence($property_ids, 1, 10) return
    collection('bdb/properties.dbxml')/properties/property@property_id = $id
    }</properties>
    And some times query will change like the following way based on the filter option in my page(means sort by only sale_price field):
    let $property_ids:=
    for $property in collection('bdb/properties.dbxml')/properties/property
    order by $property/sale_price/number() descending
    return $property/@property_id
    return <properties>{
    for $id in subsequence($property_ids, 1, 10) return
    collection('bdb/properties.dbxml')/properties/property@property_id = $id
    }</properties>
    then from the first page its self its performance is very slow(15%).
    Could you please check my query and help me to solve the issue...
    Thank you,
    Vijesh

  • Artist for sorting issues

    Hi,
    I have more and more Asian artists on my iTunes player and for the accuracy of last fm scrobbling I'm using the Asian alphabets, but as I can't read (and memorize) Asian alphabets I use the romanized equivalents in the "for sorting" ("pour le tri" in French) fields, BUT we can't enter an artist name for sorting for several tracks at the same time like we can for the artist and title fields, that's a big issue, so for now I use the "artist of the album" instead of "artist for sorting", do Apple plan to fix the limited use of the "for sorting" feature?
    Best.

    There is a way of entering sort fields on multiple tracks.
    First enter and save the information in one track and save it.
    The select the track and right click, you will discover an apply sort field option which gives several ways of adding the sort field to other tracks.
    Message was edited by: polydorus

  • Cover Flow Sorting Issue - Workaround

    Here is a temporary solution to the Cover Flow view & the Album Art Grouping view.
    As many of you know the sorting by 'Album' or 'Album by Artist' or 'Album by Year' in the above mentioned views is not correctly prioritized.
    The issue stems from the fact that the sort algorithm prioritized 'Artist' over the expected logic implied by grouping by the sort field name. So if a single album contains tracks all by different artists, you will get a Album Cover for each artist NOT each album.
    To get around this (until Apple fixes it) use the 'Album Artist' field (which is usually, but not always, empty) and set this field to a common value for an entire album — such as 'Various Artists.' When doing so, the logic will still sort on the Artist Name first, but will group the entire album together.
    If Sorting by "Album by Year" then the only hitch to this method is if you have two or more albums with the same & progressive title (see example below.) Then the album will sort in order of the Artist name of the 1st track of the album. — This probably will affect nearly zero of the the iTunes population though.
    e.g. The album sort order will be:
    Album: "Music 02" 1st track Artist: "Astro"
    Album: "Music 03" 1st track Artist: "Terra"
    Album: "Music 01" 1st track Artist: "Viggio"
    Once again just set each album with a common "Album Artist" descriptor. I use "Various Artists"
    -Alan
    Note: Also there is a new field in the info tags for each song called 'Album Artist.'
    AlBook, TiBook, iMac, iBook   Mac OS X (10.4.5)   Corporate / mixed environment / multiple networks.

    Hi,
    just change the switch Compilation to true for all songs in the album and it works too.

Maybe you are looking for

  • Jabber Questions

    I have a whole lot of questions in regards to Jabber, please see below: Are there API's available for the Jabber application and AnyConnect client? Is there a way to configure Jabber via a hyperlink? Much like how CUMA used to do it for Blackberrys.

  • How can I center a symbol on a responsive page created with adobe edge ?

    Hi everybody ! I started working on Adobe Edge Animate for about 1 month now, it's a great tool for a young web designer like me. Actualy, I'm working on my responsive personal website and I encountered some problems. When I create a new symbol and t

  • Accessing a private variable from a public method of the same class

    can anyone please tell me how to access a private variable, declared in a private method from a public method of the same class? here is the code, i'm trying to get the variable int[][][] grids. public static int[][] generateS(boolean[][] constraints

  • How do I remove an SD card from the CD-ROM Drive that also has a CD stuck in the drive?

    Hi!  I need some assistance.  We had an individual accidently miss the SD slot on the iMac and placed the SD card into the CD-ROM Drive of the computer. On top of that, a CD was placed in the drive as well and will no longer eject.  Is there a way fo

  • Skype doesn't show up at all

    Hi there, I tried to install skype today. Installation went without any hitches, but running skype doesn't do anything. There's no window popping up, there's no icon in the systray, just nothing. No error messages either, when starting skype from the