My Discussions account shows more questions than I actually have

When I click on the "You have 6 unresolved questions" which is displayed in the right hand panel of my discussions account, I see only 3 unresolved questions. What happened to the other ones?
Weird.

Thanks but since the number of questions is listed but the questions themselves are not listed in "unresolved questions", there is no way for me to sort of do just that ...
Sorry, I read your original question to mean something like, "How can I mark my questions as 'Answered' when I can't see them on the My Questions page, and what causes this to happen?"

Similar Messages

HT201210 My Music library is showing more songs than I actually have? How do I fix this?

My actual music library on my phone is showing 100+ more songs than I actually have. But on my computer it's showing a completely different (less) number? Should I restore?

Try:
- Reset the iOS device. Nothing will be lost
Reset iOS device: Hold down the On/Off button and the Home button at the same time for at
least ten seconds, until the Apple logo appears.
- Unsync all music and resync
- Reset all settings
Go to Settings > General > Reset and tap Reset All Settings.
All your preferences and settings are reset. Information (such as contacts and calendars) and media (such as songs and videos) aren’t affected.
- Restore from backup. See:
iOS: How to back up
- Restore to factory settings/new iOS device.

IPad mail icon shows more emails than there actually is?

My iPad shows more unread emails than there actually is - How do I fix this?

I figured it out! Clicked on EDIT then clicked on "mark as unread," on the bottom of the page; then clicked "mark as read," and it was fixed.

If Apple incorrectly showed more bars than it should have... wouldn't most

phone makers do the same, to make their phone look better?
I lost two bar after upgrading, but I do seem to have similar service. No dropped calls.

I wouldnt say that they are throwing at&t under the bus.. It will just keep at&t honest about where the weak spots are. I would say that they are showing a "truer" signal than was previously shown. Granted my personal opinion like in my previous post.. my best dBm level i've ever seen on my BlackBerry was -70dBm which was full 5 bars. but according to apples new software that 70dBm is within the "5 bar" limit. altho its much closer to the 4 bar section. So realistically should the blackberry have shown 4 instead of 5? Im curious to see if any former blackberry users like myself are able to mention if they have ever had lower than a -70dBm reading on their berry and how their new signal on the iPhone 4 matches up. I usually display the same level signal (with 4.0.1) as i did with my bold 9000. There are some locations that i will show 3 bars where it used to be 5 - but its a very reliable 3 (even had data rates in the 4000kbps down/2400kbps up) in the 3 bar range. So i'm very pleased.

Time Machine Backing up more data than I actually have

I have approximately 280 gigs of stuff on my hard drive. I have attempted to use TM to back up everything to a 1TB external hard drive multiple times.
I let it back up overnight. When I come to the office in the morning it will say something like: "725.6 G of 725.6 G backed up" then both numbers will continue to go up. So, I stop the backup.
I've combed through all of the support articles/posts here and on other sites. I've reformatted the drive several times, I've excluded pretty much everything including the external hard drive itself.
(Strangely enough, when I exclude the external hard drive, the exclude panel says that it has 630G worth of data on it. In the general TM preferences, it says it is empty. I've erased it several times. The finder shows the HD as empty... But, that may just be unrelated)
I don't have VM ware. I don't have any antivirus programs. The only thing that no one else seems to have mentioned on the forums is that my computer is networked.
In short, I have 300G worth of data that I need backed up. I have an empty 1TB drive. When I attempt to do so, it backs up 700+G before I stop it.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

probonoindustries wrote:
I have approximately 280 gigs of stuff on my hard drive. I have attempted to use TM to back up everything to a 1TB external hard drive multiple times.
I let it back up overnight. When I come to the office in the morning it will say something like: "725.6 G of 725.6 G backed up" then both numbers will continue to go up. So, I stop the backup.
What's shown for the "Estimated size of full backup" under the exclusions box in TM Preferences?
I've excluded pretty much everything including the external hard drive itself.
Your TM drive should be excluded automatically, and shown in gray, meaning you can't remove the exclusion. If it's not, do a "full reset" per #A4 in the Time Machine - Troubleshooting *User Tip,* also at the top of this forum.
(Strangely enough, when I exclude the external hard drive, the exclude panel says that it has 630G worth of data on it. In the general TM preferences, it says it is empty. I've erased it several times. The finder shows the HD as empty... But, that may just be unrelated)
Check it's setup, via #C1 in the Troubleshooting Tip. Also see if it has more than one partition (the indented line or lines under the main one for the drive in the Disk Utility sidebar). If it has more than one, should it? If so, be sure the other partition is excluded. If not, reformat it to a single partition per the instructions in #5 of the Frequently Asked Questions *User Tip,* also at the top of this forum.
The only thing that no one else seems to have mentioned on the forums is that my computer is networked.
That shouldn't be a problem, as Time Machine cannot back up a network drive.

ColdFusion 11: custom serialisers. More questions than answers

G'day:
I am reposting this from my blog ("ColdFusion 11: custom serialisers. More questions than answers") at the suggestion of Adobe support:
@dacCfml @ColdFusion Can you post your queries at http://t.co/8UF4uCajTC for all cfclient and mobile queries.— Anit Kumar Panda (@anitkumar85) April 29, 2014
This particular question is not regarding <cfclient>, hence posting it on the regular forum, not on the mobile-specific one as Anit suggested. I have edited this in places to remove language that will be deemed inappropriate by the censors here. Changes I have made are in [square brackets]. The forums software here has broken some of the styling, but so be it.
G'day:
I've been wanting to write an article about the new custom serialiser one can have in ColdFusion 11, but having looked at it I have more questions than I have answers, so I have put it off. But, equally, I have no place to ask the questions, so I'm stymied. So I figured I'd write an article covering my initial questions. Maybe someone can answer then.
ColdFusion 11 has added the notion of a custom serialiser a website can have (docs: "Support for pluggable serializer and deserializer"). The idea is that whilst Adobe can dictate the serialisation rules for its own data types, it cannot sensibly infer how a CFC instance might get serialised: as each CFC represents a different data "schema", there is no "one size fits all" approach to handling it. So this is where the custom serialiser comes in. Kind of. If it wasn't a bit rubbish. Here's my exploration thusfar.
One can specify a custom serialiser by adding a setting to Application.cfc:
component { this.name = "serialiser01"; this.customSerializer="Serialiser"; }
In this case the value - Serialiser - is the name of a CFC, eg:
// Serialiser.cfccomponent { public function canSerialize(){ logArgs(args=arguments, from=getFunctionCalledName()); return true; } public function canDeserialize(){ logArgs(args=arguments, from=getFunctionCalledName()); return true; } public function serialize(){ logArgs(args=arguments, from=getFunctionCalledName()); return "SERIALISED"; } public function deserialize(){ logArgs(args=arguments, from=getFunctionCalledName()); return "DESERIALISED"; } private function logArgs(required struct args, required string from){ var dumpFile = getDirectoryFromPath(getCurrentTemplatePath()) & "dump_#from#.html"; if (fileExists(dumpFile)){ fileDelete(dumpFile); } writeDump(var=args, label=from, output=dumpFile, format="html"); } }
This CFC needs to implement four methods:
canSerialize() - indicates whether something can be serialised by the serialiser;
canDeserialize() - indicates whether something can be deserialised by the serialiser;
serialize() - the function used to serialise something
deserialize() - the function used to deserialise something
I'm being purposely vague on those functions for a reason. I'll get to that.
The first [issue] in the implementation here is that for the custom serialisation to work, all four of those methods must be implemented in the serisalisation CFC. So common sense would dictate that a way to enforce that would be to require the CFC to implement an interface. That's what interfaces are for. Now I know people will argue the merit of having interfaces in CFML, but I don't really give a [monkey's] about that: CFML has interfaces, and this is what they're for. So when one specifies the serialiser in Application.cfc and it doesn't fulfil the interface requirement, it should error. Right then. When one specifies the inappropriate tool for the job. What instead happens is if the functions are omitted, one will get erratic behaviour in the application, through to outright errors when ColdFusion goes to call the functions and cannot find it. EG: if I have canSerialize() but no serialize() method, CF will error when it comes to serialise something:
JSON serialization failure: Unable to serialize to JSON.
Reason : The method serialize was not found in component C:/wwwroot/scribble/shared/git/blogExamples/coldfusion/CF11/customerserialiser/Serialiser .cfc.
The error occurred inC:/wwwroot/scribble/shared/git/blogExamples/coldfusion/CF11/customerserialiser/testBasic.c fm: line 4
2 : o = new Basic();
3 :
4 : serialised = serializeJson(o);5 : writeDump([serialised]);
6 :
Note that the error comes when I go to serialise something, not when ColdFusion is told about the serialiser in the first place. This is just lazy/thoughtless implementation on the part of Adobe. It invites bugs, and is just sloppy.
The second [issue] follows immediately on from this.
Given my sample serialiser above, I then run this test code to examine some stuff:
o = new Basic(); serialised = serializeJson(o); writeDump([serialised]); deserialised = deserializeJson(serialised); writeDump([deserialised]);
So all I'm doing is using (de)serializeJson() as a baseline to see how the functions work. here's Basic.cfc, btw:
component { }
And the test output:
array
1
SERIALISED
array
1
DESERIALISED
This is as one would expect. OK, so that "works". But now... you'll've noted I am logging the arguments each of the serialisation methods receives, as I got.
Here's the arguments passed to canSerialize():
canSerialize - struct
1
XML
My reaction to that is: "[WTH]?" Why is canSerialize() being passed the string "XML" when I'm trying to serialise an object of type Basic.cfc?
Here's the docs for canSerialize() (from the page I linked to earlier):
CanSerialize - Returns a boolean value and takes the "Accept Type" of the request as the argument. You can return true if you want the customserialzer to serialize the data to the passed argument type.
Again, back to "[WTH]?" What's the "Accept type" of the request? And what the hell has the request got to do with a call to serializeJson()? You might think that "Accept type" references some HTTP header or something, but there is no "Accept type" header in the HTTP spec (that I can find: "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1: 14 Header Field Definitions"). There's an "Accept" header (in this case: "text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,image/webp,*/*;q=0.8"), and other ones like "Accept-Encoding", "Accept-Language"... but none of which contain a value of "XML". Even if there was... how would it be relevant to the question as to whether a Basic.cfc instance can be serialised? Raised as bug: 3750730.
serialize() gets more sensible arguments:
serialize - struct
1
https://www.blogger.com/nullserialize - component scribble.shared.git.blogExamples.coldfusion.CF11.customerserialiser.Basic
2
JSON
So the first is the object to serialise (which surely should be part of the question canSerialize() is supposed to ask, and the format to serialise to. Cool.
canDeserialize() is passed this:
canDeserialize - struct
1
JSON
I guess it's because it's being called from deserializeJson(), so it's legit to expect the input value is indeed JSON. Fair enough. (Note: I'm not actually passing it JSON, but that's beside the point here).
And deserialize() is passed this:
deserialize - struct
1
SERIALISED
2
JSON
3
[empty string]
The first argument is the value to work on, and the second is the type of deserialisation to do. I have no idea what the third argument is for, and it's not mentioned directly or indirectly on that docs page. So dunno what the story is there.
The next issue isn't a code-oriented one, but an implementation one: how the hell are we expected to work with this?
The only way to work here is for each function to have a long array of IF/ELSEIF statements which somehow identify each object type that is serialisable, and then return true from canSerialise(), or in the case of serialize(), go ahead and do the serialisation. So this means this one CFC needs to know about everything which can be serialised in the entire application. Talk about a failure in "separation of concerns".
You know the best way of determining if an object can be seriaslised? Ask it! Don't rely on something else needing to know. This can be achieved very easily in one of two ways:
Check to see if the object implements a "Serializable" interface, which requires a serialize() method to exist.
Or simply take the duck-typing approach: if a CFC implements a serialize() method: it can be serialised. By calling that method. Job done.
Either approach would work fine, keeps things nicely encapsulated, and I see merits in both. And either make far more sense than Adobe's approach. Which is like something from the "OO Failures Special Needs" class.
Deserialisation is trickier. Because it relies on somehow working out how to deserialise() an object. I'm not sure of the best approach here, but - again - how to deserialise something should be as close to the thing needing deserialisation as possible. IE: something in the serialised data itself which can be used to bootstrap the process.
This could simply be a matter of specifying a CFC type at a known place in the serialised data. EG: Adobe stipulates that if the serialised data is JSON, and at the top level of the JSON is a key eg: type, and the value is an extant CFC... use that CFC's deserialize() method. Or it could look for an object which contains a type and a method, or whatever. But Adobe can specify a contract there.
The only place I see a centralised CFC being relevant here is for a mechanism for handling serialised data that is neither a ColdFusion internal type, nor identifiable as above. In this case, perhaps they could provide a mechanism for a serialisation router, which basically has a bunch of routes (if/elseifs if need be) which contains logic as to how to work out how to deserialise the data. But it should not be the actual deserialiser, it should simply have the mechanism to find out how to do it. This is actually pretty much the same in operation as the deserialize() approach in the current implementation, but it doesn't need the canDeserialize() method (it can return false at the end of the routing), and it doesn't need to know about serialising. And also it's not the main mechanism to do the deserialisation, it's just the fall back if the prescribed approach hasn't been used.
TBH, this still sounds a bit jerry-built, and I'm open for better suggestions. This is probably a well-trod subject in other languages, so it might be worth looking at how the likes of Groovy, Ruby or even PHP (eek!) achieve this.
There's still another issue with the current approach. And this demonstrates that the Adobe guys don't actually work with either CFML applications or even modern websites. This approach only works for a single, stand-alone website (like how we might have done in 2001). What if I'm not in the business of building websites, but I build applications such as FW/1 or ColdBox or the like? Or any sort of "helper" application. They cannot use the current Adobe implementation of the customserializer. Why? Because the serialisation code needs to be in a website-specific CFC. There's no way for Luis to implement a custom serialiser in ColdBox (for example), and then have it work for someone using ColdBox. Because it relies on either editing Application.cfc to specify a different CFC, or editing the existing customSerializer CFC. Neither of which are very good solutions. This should have been immediately apparent to the Adobe engineer(s) implementing this stuff had they actually had any experience with modern web applications (which generally aren't just a single monolithic site, but an aggregation of various other sub applications). Equally, I know it's not a case of having thought about this and [I'm just missing something], because when I asked them the other day, at first they didn't even get what I was asking, but when I clarified were just like "oh yeah... um... err... yeah, you can't do that. We'll... have to... ah yeah". This has been raised as bug 3750731.
So I declare the intent here valid, but the implementation to be more alpha- / pre-release- quality, not release-ready.
Still: it could be easily deprecated and rework fairly easily. I've raised this as bug 3750732.
Or am I missing something?
Adam

Yes, you can easily add additional questions to the Lookup.WebClient.Questions Lookup to allow some additional choices. We have added quite a few additional choices, we have noticed that removing them once people have selected them causes some errors.
You can also customize the required number of questions to select when each user sets them up as well as the number required to be correct to reset the password, these options are in the System Configuration settings.
If you need multi-language versions of the questions, you will also need to modify the appropriate language resource file in the xlWebApp.war file to provide the necessary translations for the values entered into the Lookup.

Why does my exported swf show more content than actually on frame?

Why does my exported .swf show more content than actually on frame?
My problem is relatively simple, though, I had some trouble finding a solution to it:
When I play my exported animation using flash player in Google Chrome, if the window is bigger than the resolution flash document/frame, it shows content not meant to show up on the frame -- like parts of a huge background that aren't supposed to show up yet.
In other words, how do I constraint the .swf to the white background/document resolution?

Anyone? I'd appreciate it if someone replied soon -- I am done with my project once this issue is resolved, and I am excited to publish it.
Please respond if you have any useful knowledge on the matter!
Thanks!

Control array's scrollbar shows more rows than dimensions

When an array's dimension and Number of Rows property are set to the same value, its vertical scrollbar is shown and implies there is one more row available in the array than the actual array size.
This happen only if the array is a control, not when it is an indicator. As an indicator, no scrollbar is shown at run time. In edit mode, a scrollbar is shown when as an indicator.
Is there a way to not have the scollbar appear if the number of rows equals the array size yet have it appear when the number of rows is less than the array size ?
Example vi attached.
Attachments:
Array scroll bar dimension.vi ‏18 KB

Jennifer,
In practice, the number of displayed array rows is restricted so that only enough rows are shown to remain within the bounds of the front panel. Otherwise as the array size is increased, the array will extend off the bottom of the screen. My modified version shows this restriction. But notice that as a control, the array shows one more dimension than it had been allocated to (and is shown as a disabled row). In fact, clicking on the bottom arrow of the scollbar will continue to add more rows to the array control.
Steve
Attachments:
Array scroll bar dimension.vi ‏22 KB

CallsAnsweredToHalf shows more calls than CallsHandledToHalf + ReserveCallsToHalf columns

We're running UCCE 8.5 with CVP 8.0 and UCM 7.5
When I look at the Agent_Skill_Group_Half_Hour table I see that the
CallsAnsweredToHalf column equals the sum of the CallsHandledToHalf and the ReserveCallsToHalf columns but only 95% of the time.
What I mean is that out of the 300+ agents we have for 10 of them it doesn't match. The CallsAnsweredToHalf column shows 1 more call than in the
CallsHandledToHalf and ReserveCallsToHalf columns.
I have looked and compared at the other columns to see if maybe there's a third column in the mix but it doesn't look like it.
Does anybody know why of this discrepancy? a bug maybe?
thanks

Hi,
It wont be same always the CallsAnsweredToHalf and CallsHandledToHalf because with in half hour which are call is answered by the agent is updated in the CallsAnsweredToHalf column but only the calls that have been answered and have completed wrap-up by agents in the skill group during the half-hour interval will be updated in the CallsHandledToHalf column.
Regards,
Gnaneswaran.

BW Query showing more Material than R/3 Query, Why..??

Hi All,
I am facing problem when running the query on Inventory cube 0IC_C03.
I have loaded data from 3 Data Sources 2LIS_03_BX, 2LIS_03_BF and 2LIS_03_UM as mentioned in below link and strictly followed by applying Marker updates after the load
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/f83be790-0201-0010-4fb0-98bd7c01e328
Now the problem is,
End User trying to compare BW Inventory Query (Plant Analysis: Stock) values with MC.1 (Plant Analysis: Stock: Selection)
In R/3 (MC.1) showing the total number of materials are 3755 for the period 01.2008
In BW Query for the same period (01.2008) total number of materials are 3960
I am doubting why BW showing more materials?, this resulting the differance value for Valueated Stock value and Valuated Stock Quantity when we compare with R/3.
When i am comparing material wise in BW query with MC.1, whatever the missing Materials are showing in BW Query as 0 Quantity but some value
Ex: Values is = -£ 51.46 and Quantity is = 0 EA
Please provide me some inputs, your help will be appreciated.
Regards,
Rajesh

Hi Rajesh,
Please check the Material numbers which are coming extra in BW not in R/3 whether they are under any material group. If they are all in under the "#" material group then u can restrict the query by filtering the material group "#".
Just filter Excluding the "#" material group in the query.
Then you will get the right values.
Hope this may help you.
The difference between the BW and R/3 material numbers is because. Some extra materials may get from the UM datasource, so you are getting only values and not the quantities.
Try the above idea. I hope it works.
With Regards,
Ravi Kanth.

Sending queue says I'm sending more messages than I actually am...

When sending emails on Mac Mail, the queue notifcation is always higher than the actual number of emails sent. Why is that? What else is sending and where is it going?!?!? For example, I just sent one email to two different people.. but the queue notification said I sent 3 mails.
Very confusing, and I can find no evidence in the 'sent' folder of this phantom email.

This is happening for me as well. I'm very worried that I am sending some kind of ick through email that I can't prevent.

Usage showing more memory than is accounted for

how do i get rid of 'other' storage bloating?

Other is email, text messages, and the stuff that apps use in the background, like when you save your place in a game. You can try deleting old email and text messages. Specifically if people send you pictures in text messages and as attachments.
Other than that, yes you need to restore your phone as new and do not restore from a backup, the backup will put the "Other" stuff right back on your phone.

Reports showing more visits than Google Analytics

Question:
I have been receiving significantly high reports on numerous blogs posted across two different sites. When I compare the BC report to Google Analytics it's a massive different in numbers/page views.
Page views on web pages seems normal. But the blog reporting is significantly higher than what we suspect.
Answer:
A couple of things:
1, Always expect a 10% difference between BC reporting and a JavaScript based solution such as Google Analytics, as roughly 10% of web users browse with JavaScript disabled.
With this disabled, Google Analytics has a very limited ability for tracking unique user visits, as it can't place a cookie on their system or send data back to the Google servers.
As BC's tracking is all done server side (ie. not some code snippet you're pasting in), it should be able to more accurately measure these statistics.
2. Some web crawlers may not bypass BCs filtering and hence be recorded as hits.
For instance, with your blog you may have more heavily distributed links throughout the web via social media. A whole range of crawlers, archivers and indexers then visit those links to absorb the information and further spread it.
Most of these automated browsers have JavaScript disabled, so again, your Google Analytics simply won't pick their traffic up.
BC will record their traffic however, and they actively try to filter these out - but I'm sure some inevitably fall through the cracks and get marked as legitimate traffic.

Hi,
Its just a general thought and I realize you know your application and user community better I do, but do you think your users are going to be very happy when they are presented with a report with more than a hundred columns? Have you considered maybe presenting the data in some sort of rolled up form from which the user can then drill down to the data they are particularly interested in. Also, I'm sure your LAN administrator would be happy not to see 100+ column by x number row reports being regularly shipped across the network.
Also, 100+ column reports suggests tables with 100+ columns which are probably not designed in a very relationally compliant way. I find that good DB design usually results in applications that have to make less compromises, such as hacking export files in order to fool the API into making ridiculous, unsupported and unsupportable compromises.
Just a thought..................
Regards
Andre

My HD icon on the desktop is showing far more free space than I actually have.

I use a 2011 17" MBP with OS X Lion (750GB HD, 8GB RAM, 2.2GHz i7) and have noticed recently (only since I bought the new OS) that the Hard Drive icon on my desktop shows far more free space available than I know I have. It shows 488GB free of 497GB (with 250GB on a partition for Windows 7 Enterprise) and I know I have about 250-300GB worth of stuff. I've checked several times to ensure it's still there and all my files still work so it doesn't seem to be deleting things randomly. I just want to know if it's a calculation bug or if there's something else wrong. Thanks for any help in advance!

In case anyone reads this wondering if there's a solution, there is: turn off automatic time machine backups, and restart your computer. It turns out I had about 80GB worth of data stacking up between physical backups to external HDs. Apparently it counts as free space because it can be over-written when necessary, hence an elated free space count.
I also did a disk repair on the partition which OS X is on, which fixed some "minor logging issues" but I don't think that made a difference because nothing happened until I cleared the backup cache by turning off time machine. By the way, once I turned off time machine my HD free space sky-rocketed to 576GB of 497GB which freaked me out but don't worry, this is fixed once you restart.

Expert Live Chat - More questions than answers?!

Shall we dissect today's chat then?
It sounded like an exciting idea. But I was left sorely disappointed.
No plans to enable the best features of mediaroom - the ability to access it from your laptop, phone and xbox.
Multi-room's something they're keen to offer in the future. (Wow - 4 years not long enough?!)
No details on whether the vbox will remain mediaroom or change for YouView.
No news on HD.
No news on Live IPTV
Overall I think it would be more beneficial if Cey just posted on the forum occasionally than we have a live chat. There was a fair amount of time wasted on regular forum type questions.

Oh well. Glad I missed it then.

My Discussions account shows more questions than I actually have

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for