Unable to sort merged roles

Hello,
We want to sort some folders that are in different roles but portal only sorts some of them.
We use Merge Priority with secuential numbers that will determine the role order.
Anybody knows if there is something left or if we need another property to get it?
Thanks in advance

Hi,
There is no restrictions for not sorting 2nd level navigation.
The Property Editor always sets 100 as Sort Priority, so If you set the Sort Priority explicitly, between 0 and 100, sorting should work.
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw2004s/helpdata/en/92/3e703e632c7937e10000000a114084/frameset.htm
Greetings,
Praveen Gudapati

Similar Messages

Why am I unable to sort the music on my iPhone 4S when viewing it in iTunes?

Hello,
Apologies if this has been answered already; I searched for it but none of the results appeared relevent to my issue.
I have an ipod touch 4th generation, which I manually manage from the the iTunes library on my home PC (Windows 7, 32bit). I am able to plug the ipod touch into my work laptop, to listen to the music on it through iTunes. I can see the list of songs on my ipod via the 'Music' tab of the 'Devices' section in iTunes. In that view, I am also able to sort the list as I see fit, by clicking on the various column headings to change the order of that column appropriately.
I have recently purchased an iPhone 4S, and loaded it with music from my own computer's iTunes library in the same way I did for my ipod. However, when viewing the songs on my 4S on my work laptop in the same way as above, I am unable to sort the view at all. Why is this?
It's annoying not being able to sort the songs in an order different to how they were sorted on the parent machine. For example, if I'm looking in my song list for a song I added recently, I was able to find them on my ipod by simply ordering the list by Date Added or Date Modified, but there seems to be no way of doing this for the 4S?
Thanks in advance.

Thanks for your message.
I have downloaded the latest iTunes [11.1.5 (5)] with no luck, unfortunately. As it did with 11.1.4 (62), iTunes recognizes my iPhone, I can select the music to sync, click sync, it appears to sync but remains completely unchanged in my iPhone music.
Any tips are welcome!

HT1296 whenever I try to sync my phone with itunes, it prompt with a window saying that this computer is not authorised. Although I again authorise my computer through store option but again while sync it shows the same window. I am unable to sort it out

whenever I try to sync my phone with itunes, it prompt with a window saying that this computer is not authorised. Although I again authorise my computer through store option but again while sync it shows the same window. I have reinstaled itunes also but invain. I am unable to sort it out pl help

Hello dizzy bizzy,
Thank you for providing the details of the issue you are experiencing with purchases from the iTunes Store. I recommend following the steps in the following article:
iTunes repeatedly prompts to authorize computer to play iTunes Store purchases
http://support.apple.com/kb/ts1389
Thank you for using Apple Support Communities.
Best,
Sheila M.

GRC 10 EAM - Unable to assign Firefighter roles to owners

Greetings SAP gurus,
I am currently on a new GRC 10 installation and having issues with the Emergency Access Management (EAM) component previously known as FireFighter or SPM. Note: We are trying to implement the Firefighter ''Role-Based" Approach.
Issue: We are unable to assign EAM roles to owners within NWBC. Click on 'Assign owners to Firefigher ID's and provision Firefighter ID's to firefighters' via the Access Management Tab within NWBC, option Superuser Assignment. Click on Assign. We are able to find the owners, but when I search for roles to assign, I get the error, 'No records found for the search criteria entered''.
We are on SP7.
Items completed:
1) All post installation tasks were completed correctly, i.e. BC sets activated, connector groups created and working.
2) EAM roles created on target system and imported via BRM.
3) EAM role properties edited for "Firefighting' usage in BRM, role owners defined, functional areas defined, business process and sub process areas defined.
4) Access control owners (i.e. role owners and controllers) defined.
5) The ID being used for configuration is currently assigned all GRC_NWBC roles available.
6) The connector groups are working fine and we are using for the Access risk Analysis component which is working fine.
7) The post EAM configuration steps has been completed.
Has anyone else experienced a similar issue? I look forward to your responses.
Rgds,
Prevlin Moodley

Hello Prevlin,
Are you using a FF role owner for the assignment. This might be helpful:
[Note 1289579 - Firefighter Owner additional authorization for Role based FF|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1289579]
Cheers,
Diego.

Unable to sort profit center as ascending & Decending order in KE80 & KE30

Hi,
When viewing KE30/KE80 reports and navigating by a field such as profit centre, appear to be unable to sort in ascending/descending order.
e.g. run a KE80 Report: i.e. ZPC-9000 & i.e. variant SMKT, and execute the report click on "Profit Center" under the navigation line to navigate it out to the right. Then click on the magnify glass next to the PC number (should bring up the list of all available PCs, 1259 entries found).
From this pop-up box, unable to sort the PCs by ascending/descending order regardless of what you click.Also unable to sort the Long Text by ascending/descending order regardless of what you click
Can anyone pls help on the above issue.We have to apply any note for this???.
Thanks & Regards
Mani

Dear Mani,
you can sort the entries by right-clicking on the column header and chosing the sorting order in the appearing menu.
Cheers,
Daniela

"VLD-2780: Unable to generate Merge statement".

Folks,
I am trying to validate my mapping before deployment but I am getting the following error: "VLD-2780: Unable to generate Merge statement".
- I am mapping 5 tables from my source to one table in my target by using a joiner.The primary key in my target table is also my synthetic key. (I have created a sequence on the primary key)
-When the "Match by constraint" in the operator properties of the target table is set to "All constraints" I get the VLD-2780 error message during validation.
- However when the "Match by constraint" is set to "No constraints" I can generate the merge statement in my intermediate result but my validation is now giving me this message:"VLD-2750: Missing update matching criteria in TARGET_TABLE".
- My synthetic key property is set as follow:
Load Column when Inserting Row = Yes
Load Column when Updating Row = No
Match Column when Updating Row = No
Update:Operation =
Match Column when Deleting Row = Yes
I have tried other options wihout much success. I can't seem to pass the validation step.
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks Much!

There are two ways of matching incomming rows with rows present in a target table during updates. One is to use the key constraints. You can see this by inspecting the target object properties in the mapping and checking the 'Match by constraint' parameter. This is recommended in case you have defined key constraints on the target objects.
The other (if match by constraints is set to 'no constraints') is to set the Match Column when Updating to yes (and conversely, Load Column when Updating to 'No') for individual columns that have to be matched (as sugested above).
If you get the VLD-2750 message, it means that one of the target objects does not have any matching criteria set for updates. In an insert/update mapping you should use either the first or the second matching method for all your target objects.
Regards:
Igor

Nested loop join v/s Sort merge

I have seen that nested loops are better if the inner table is being indexed, because for each outer table row, we are looking for a match in the inner table. But is there any case when optimizer still goes for a nested loop even if there is no index on the inner table. That is my first question ?
My second question := When doing a sort merge join oracle has to sort both result sets and then merge them. Oracle says that if both the row sets, if already sorted is definately better for performance. Ya thats obvious. But back to my upper question, when there is no index on the inner table, is it the situation when oracle goes for a sort merge join ?

My response should really have examples but since I do not have any handy I will just say about your first question. If there is no index available from table A to table B yes it is possible a nested loop join may still be used and table B read via full table scan within a nested loop. If table B is very small and consists of only a block or two this may be relatively efficient plan. It is more likely you sould see table B full scanned and the result feed into a hash join, but I have seen the plan you mention.
Back before hash joins were introduced with 7.3 (if my memory is correct) you would see sort/merge joins used more often than you do now. Generally speaking no index on the join conditions would exist for this option to be chosen.
If you really want to know why and sometimes what the optimizer is going to do buy Jonathan Lewis's book Cost-Based Oracle Fundamentals. If explains the optimizer in more depth than any other source I know of.
HTH -- Mark D Powell --

Using Sort Merge Hint

Hi,
I'm trying to force oracle to use the sort merge using hints.
Can anyone suggest why the below code is working correctly?
Please see the explain plan.
Regards, Chris.
set autotrace on
timing start
select /*+ use_merge(e) */ e.fk, d.fk
FROM girl d, boy e
WHERE e.fk = d.fk;
timing stop
spool off
set termout on
SQL> timing stop
Elapsed: 00:00:00.42
SQL> spool off
not spooling currently
SQL> set termout on
SQL> select * from girl WHERE fk = 1;
PK NAME FK
1 Hayley 1
1 julie 1
1 sian 1
Execution Plan
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 3 | 114 | 3 |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| GIRL | 3 | 114 | 3 |
Note
- 'PLAN_TABLE' is old version
Statistics
5 recursive calls
0 db block gets
16 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
573 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
381 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
3 rows processed

Thanks Dmytro, I'd just in fact solved the problem myself.
THE SQL required both tables in the brackets.
Thanks all for your help!

Problem in Merging roles

Hi Experts,
We are Merging Roles. We have HR role in which we want ESS, MSS and HR Admin Role. For these we created HR role and assigned ESS, MSS, HR Admin roles.
Only one role (first role) is displaying in HR role. We tried different options, but it is not worked.
We are using same merge id for 3 roles (ESS, MSS, and HR Admin). And can merge it True.
Kindly provide your suggestions.
Regards,
Srinivasu.Y

Hi Srinivasu,
What I believe is that u didt give the Merge Priority, which is there under Properties of a Role.
Give Merge Priority for the Roles as follows:
HR Role - 10
ESS Role -20
MSS Role - 30
HR Admin Role -40
The Merge Priority with lease value will be displayed.
Also add all the Roles (HR Role, ESS Role, MSS Role, HR Admin Role) to the particular user. And also enusure that MergeID for all the Roles (HR Role, ESS Role, MSS Role, HR Admin Role) are set to same value.
Hope this will help you.
Reply if you have any queries.
Regards,
Jithin

Why is mavericks now unable to sort by label , vital to me

the new software has totaly lost the ability to work with large blocks of file and colour codeing, unable to sort or find by label

View > Arrange By > Tags
aka Ctrl-Cmd-7
No column header clicking, but it works.

NESTED LOOP or SORT MERGE

Hi All,
How can we judge which one is best to use for the query- NESTED LOOP
- SORT MERGE
- HASH JOINThanx.. Ratan

Hi...
For Nested Loop Joins:
Nested loop joins are useful when small subsets of data are being joined and if the join condition is an efficient way of accessing the second table.
It is very important to ensure that the inner table is driven from (dependent on) the outer table. If the inner table's access path is independent of the outer table, then the same rows are retrieved for every iteration of the outer loop, degrading performance considerably. In such cases, hash joins joining the two independent row sources perform better.
For Hash Join:
Hash joins are used for joining large data sets. The optimizer uses the smaller of two tables or data sources to build a hash table on the join key in memory. It then scans the larger table, probing the hash table to find the joined rows.
For Sort Merge Joins:
Sort merge joins can be used to join rows from two independent sources. Hash joins generally perform better than sort merge joins. On the other hand, sort merge joins can perform better than hash joins if both of the following conditions exist:
The row sources are sorted already.
A sort operation does not have to be done.
However, if a sort merge join involves choosing a slower access method (an index scan as opposed to a full table scan), then the benefit of using a sort merge might be lost.
Sort merge joins are useful when the join condition between two tables is an inequality condition (but not a nonequality) like <, <=, >, or >=. Sort merge joins perform better than nested loop joins for large data sets. You cannot use hash joins unless there is an equality condition.
In a merge join, there is no concept of a driving table. The join consists of two steps:
Sort join operation: Both the inputs are sorted on the join key.
Merge join operation: The sorted lists are merged together.
If the input is already sorted by the join column, then a sort join operation is not performed for that row source.

Sort-Merge outer join, why? when?

Hi All,
How Oracle runs/optimizes outer joins has always been my subject of curiocity.
In Oracle documentation V 10.1 -> Performance tuning guide -> Chap. 14 ( The Query Optimizer) -> Go almost at the bottom
There is a small section of "Sort Merge outer joins".
It has a sentence
"When an outer join cannot drive from the outer (preserved) table to the inner (optional) table, it cannot use a hash join or nested loop joins. Then it uses the sort merge outer join for performing the join operation"
Can you help me understanding this ??
Thanks in advance

You actually need a sort-merge join sometimes: a join on inequality can't be run as a hash join, and may be very inefficient as a nested loop.
e.g.
select ...
where del.delivery_date between ord.order_date + 5 and ord.order_date + 8Unfortunately there are other cases where a sort merge join could be a very efficient join mechansim - because of suitable indexes - but the optimizer won't take it because there is a bug (from my perspective, at any rate) in the cost for sorting.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

Unable to see some Roles in Query designer

Hi all,
I have created a role in PFCG having some queries and assigned that role to my user id.
When i log into Query designer i m unable to see that role and all other roles i am able to see.
What could be the reason for this?
Did i missed to assign any authorizations?
Thanks,
Jaya.

Hi Anoop,
The variable is probably being used to restrict a key figure.
Go to the key figures,
Display the technical names
Check the key figures for which the technical name is not appearing even though the key figure is not a formula.
Here you will see one of the key figure being restricted by a variable for 0calday
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Joe
Didnt notice the question is answered :P
Edited by: lazarus_joey on Feb 17, 2012 6:48 PM

Finder unable to sort file name in Column mode

Hi Guys,
About 2 weeks ago suddenly Finder are unable to sort files in alphabetical order in Column mode.
About the same time when my external HDD died (don't know whether this has any effect).
Sorting by name works fine in icon only mode, but whenever I switch to Column mode its completely disorganized.
And when I tried in coverflow mode its alphabetical but in inverted mode (Z to A).
I tried verifying disk permission and repairing it to no effect.
Any clues on how to fix this?
Thanks,
Jeff

This fixed it: http://inner.geek.nz/archives/2011/08/10/howto-fix-file-sorting-in-finders-colum n-view-on-mac-os-x-lion/
This problem has been bugging me forever!

Balanced Two way sort merge!Algorithm

What is the algorithm for the balanced two way sort merge?

Follow this [_link_|http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=balanced+two+way+sort+merge]

Unable to sort merged roles

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for