Unpredictable sort behavior in generic Rowset pageflow?

Has anyone else noticed somewhat random behavior for the sort functionality of
columns in a grid from a RowSet based Pageflow. I generated a page flow in workshop
based on a simple RowSet control. Clicking on a column will often leave the column
partially sorted. Clicking on it again will reverse the sort direction and it
seems to then be sorted correctly. Clicking again reverses the sort direction
and it seems to be sorted correctly.
The error or odd behavior happens when you switch sort columns or first change
the sort order. The data I have is just complicated enough to make it difficult
to tell what might be happening. Did I miss some feature in the documentation
or is this a known bug?
thanks,
Morgan

Thanks again Morgan. Please do let us know if you are able to reproduce this
behavior.
Regards,
Raj Alagumalai
WebLogic Workshop Support
"Morgan Hall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..
>
Update:
I quickly created a sample table with 3 columns: number(int), letter(char10),
complex(varchar 50) in SQL Server 2000. Using this table I generated arowset
control and then built a pageflow from it.
I added numbers 1-26 in the first column, z-a in the second, and z1 - a26in the
third.
1 z z1
2 y y2 etc...
In this test case, the sorting works perfectly so I'm not sure what aboutmy other
tables causes the issues. If I determine better means to duplicate theproblem
I'll post them.
Morgan
"Morgan Hall" <[email protected]> wrote:
Has anyone else noticed somewhat random behavior for the sort
functionality
of
columns in a grid from a RowSet based Pageflow. I generated a page flow
in workshop
based on a simple RowSet control. Clicking on a column will often leave
the column
partially sorted. Clicking on it again will reverse the sort direction
and it
seems to then be sorted correctly. Clicking again reverses the sort
direction
and it seems to be sorted correctly.
The error or odd behavior happens when you switch sort columns or first
change
the sort order. The data I have is just complicated enough to make it
difficult
to tell what might be happening. Did I miss some feature in thedocumentation
or is this a known bug?
thanks,
Morgan

Similar Messages

Odd compiler behavior (re: generics)

Greetings, I am encountering a rather odd compiler generated error/warning with some code. The issue involves using an "independent" generic method of a raw-typed class. That is, the class has a variable T (call it Test<T> and has an instance method that returns ArrayList<String>. The problem: when a raw typed Test is used, the ArrayList returned is also raw. Here is some code to illustrate:
import java.util.ArrayList;
class Test<T>{
ArrayList<String> getChildren(){
    return null;
static void test1( Test t ){
    ArrayList<String> children = t.getChildren();
// WARNING:                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
//Test.java:26: warning: [unchecked] unchecked conversion
//found   : java.util.ArrayList
//required: java.util.ArrayList<java.lang.String>
static void test2( Test<?> t ){
    // OK, since we have the type variable set.
    ArrayList<String> children = t.getChildren();
}If the type variable is specified as anything but raw, then it works fine.
Is there some explantation for this behavior? My argument: since the return type of getChildren doesn't use the wildcard, why does the type argument of the implicit instance matter? Is this a compiler bug or just a "sharp edge" in the specification (perhaps even reasonable or necessary).
I know the solution (or workaround). I am just seeking an explanation.
Thanks,
- Tim

I found a bug evaluation (6358084) that was closed as not a bug where
the evaluator wrote:
All members, regardless of their dependence of type parameters, are erased.
So the compiler is correct, the method call is unchecked.
Still, I am ignorant of the reasoning for independent or fully described types.

How to change sorting behavior in column view in Lion Finder?

I love the ability to sort in column view in OS X 10.7. However, when I switch to column view and let sort by label, the Finder displays a strange behavior: The files are grouped by label, but in the order of lee to more. It does not seem possible to display according to the label order set in the Finder prefs.
This is somewhat irritating. Is there a way to change this can make it consistent to the label order?
The label order in the Finder was set to "Prio A", then "Prio B" and so forth.

If I set it to "Arrange by", I get them sorted by file name, irrespective of the color.
If I change that in the View Options, I get them sorted according to label, but not in the label order of the Finder prefs.

DataGrid paging, how do I override sorting behavior?

I've got a large dataset and I'm showing pieces of it at a
time in a DataGrid. When the user clicks a heading in the grid to
sort the data, I don't want the DataGrid to sort it. Instead, it
needs to reload the data from the server and tell the server how to
sort it. How might I go about overriding the default behavior for
heading clicks? If only there was some sort event for the
grid…

There's a protected method of the DataGrid placeSortArrow()
that "draws the sort arrow graphic on the column that is the
current sort key." Is there a way to tell the DataGrid which column
is the current sort key from my headerRelease event handler? Then
would I have to call the placeSortArrow method somehow? It's a
protected method, so could I call it if I extended the DataGrid and
called it from my custom DataGrid?
Or am I better off appending a symbol to the end of the text
of the header that's clicked?

Weird sorting behavior in AS

Consider the code:
var a:Array = new Array();
a.push({str:"a", val:2});
a.push({str:"b", val:3});
a.push({str:"c", val:2});
a.push({str:"d", val:2});
a.push({str:"e", val:3});
a.sortOn("val", 16);
for (var i:int=0; i<=4; i++){
trace(a
.str + " -- " + a.val);
It outputs:
c -- 2
d -- 2
a -- 2
b -- 3
e -- 3
Why does it change the original order - shouldn't the output
be a,c,d,b,e - whereas the output is c,d,a,b,e? I tried it in both
AVM1 and AVM2.
Any clues would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Pallav

i don't think you can guarantee the order of sorted elements
where the field you're sorting on is equal. for example, if you
sortOn val again, the order changes again:
a -- 2
d -- 2
c -- 2
b -- 3
e -- 3
if you need it to retain original sort order where sort
fields are equal you may have to write that sort routine yourself.
alternatively, if it helps you could sort on two fields:

Wierd sorting behavior in report

I have a report with many fields, a region to show/hide columns, and a region for searching (scalar search fields and multi-select fields). Sorting by toggling a column header doesn't sort the field, it does something, but it doesn't sort. Something really strange is I have a column named CPU Count and when I click on the column header for CPU Arch, it sorts the CPU Count column.
I recently did the following to change NLS_SORT to BINARY_CI and
1. In the application attributes, I set the 'Application Language Derived From'
globalization attribute to "No NLS (Application not translated)", and
left the 'Application Primary Language' setting alone (English...).
2. Created a BEFORE HEADER and ON SUBMIT BEFORE COMPUTATIONS application level process as a PL/SQL Anonymous Block to force the NLS settings using ALTER SESSION commands. Set the Sequence to 0 for both.
execute immediate 'ALTER SESSION SET NLS_DATE_FORMAT="DD-MON-YYYY"';
execute immediate 'ALTER SESSION SET NLS_SORT="BINARY_CI"';
Could this have had any impact? I don't know if column sorting worked before I made those changes or not. Looking for ideas before I take this out.
Karen

Karen,
The good news is that we can see the problem you are having.
The bad news is that we're going to have to ask you to do a bit more work so we can get to the bottom of it. If you don't mind, here is the request from Marc (our reports engine expert):
"I tried to figure out what's going on with this report, but I don't know. My guess would be some combination of changed column sequence, conditional
display of columns and show/no show columns. I tried a number of different scenarios locally, but they always worked. And in the example that user sent
us, the first couple of columns seem to be working fine. I tried purging preferences, etc., but I'm still getting strange results for e.g. the usage
column. I would need to get a reproducible case set up on my local PC, so that I can add some more debug output to reports3.plb. So if this person
could provide us with a simplified example, incl. DDL script and data load scripts that we can install locally, I can a try to investigate this further. It would also help if the user could either step by step re-create this report, with perhaps fewer columns, without changing the column sequence at first, and only later hooking up column conditions, so that we can get some more information on when the sorting gets messed up."
Thanks,
Scott

Combo Box Strange Sorting Behavior [Flex 1.5]

The combobox does not sort if i set [Editable=true] using
Flex 1.5.
But works and sort fine and give accurate results if i remove
Editable attribute from <ComboBox> tag.
Initially i hv taken editable combobox and wants to sort the
dataprovider as user enters the letter.
but in vain.
how can i achive the above.
The keyDown event calls the following function:
function
setInitialItem(t:mx.controls.ComboBox,sDataValueInit:String):Void
t.open();
if(sDataValueInit.length==1 && (Key.getCode() >=
65 && Key.getCode() <= 90))
t.dataProvider.sortOn(sDataValueInit,Array.UNIQUESORT );
}else if(sDataValueInit.length==2 && (Key.getCode()
>= 65 && Key.getCode() <= 90))
t.dataProvider.sortOn(sDataValueInit,Array.UNIQUESORT );
}else if(sDataValueInit.length==3 && (Key.getCode()
>= 65 && Key.getCode() <= 90))
t.dataProvider.sortOn(sDataValueInit,Array.UNIQUESORT );
}else if(Key.getCode() == 13 || Key.getCode() ==32){
t.close();
Thanks in Advance!
Vinay

If U have the list item as a combo box the maximun length property should be equal to the maximum length of the data displayed in the list.
In Ur case,
The length of 'FALSE' is 5.
even the value to be stored is only '0'.
The maximum length of the field should be 5.
I don't think it's a bug. The very purpose of combo box is to let the users enter the new data at run time.

Question on sort behavior when inserting ACL lines into existing ACL

Hello,
I have a request / need to insert lines into existing ACLs (some standard, some extended) and I need to control where they are added (we want some to go to the top, some in the middle, some second from bottom).
I'm trying to understand / follow how ACL lines are added / sorted. I have three examples of different configs (standard ACL) where someone inserts lines into the existing ACL.
The problem is, it does not follow the guidelines I've found on cisco.com - i.e. using Sequence #s if specified, they don't all get added to the bottom, etc.
How can I determine how a line added to an existing ACL will behave?
I've added new ACLs, and as far as I can tell, for those examples, it will follow the sequence #s for both standard and extended acls, but not at all for these examples.
thanks!
-Chris

There's a tutorial on creating client-side XSLT pages here: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/dreamweaver/articles/display_xml_data.html.
I'm not sure if it will work with a template. Unfortunately, XSLT is a mind-bender that tends to do serious damage to the average brain. That's why most people use server-side technology to deal with XML.
You mention that XSL isn't supported on your PHP server. What about SimpleXML? That's standard in all PHP 5 installations. Don't say your server is still running PHP 4. Support for PHP 4 was dropped nearly two years ago.

Strange sorting behavior with iOS calendars

My wife and I both have a two calendars (personal and business) which we are sharing with each other. So four shared calendars, two form my wife and two form myself. All four calendars are iCloud-calendars, two from my wife's account and two from mine.
All calendars are syncing with several devices: one iMac, two MacBooks, two iPads and three iPhones. Today I found out that on the iOS devices the sorting of the calendars has issues.
My preferred order is 1) my personal, 2) my business, 3) wife personal and 4) wife business. On iCloud (via browser) this is fine. On al the OS X devices also, but on the iOS devices 3 and 4 are switched (1, 2, 4, 3 instead of 1, 2, 3, 4). I can reorder them to 1,3,4,2 and several other options on the iOS devices, but 1,2,3,4 is not possible. Any ideas?

I agree Mike; the "IT pride" is a wide spread issue in this line of work that leaves a lame taste of the profession.
Long story short. It was probably corrupt image though there isn't a definitive way to confirm that (again, I try to stay away from the IT people assumptions).
What is back and white is the remedy. After formatting the flash and uploading the SAME image the SNMP problem went away.
Thanks
~B

Sorting in 6i and 10g reports

Hello All,
I am running 6i and 10g reports against a 10g database.
I ran one of the 6i report and it generated a report in one sorting ordear
and when i ran the same report on 10g ,it generated the report in ddifferent order.
Both the reports r run against the same 10g database.
The order by clause on the columns of the records r identical.
Now i wanted to understand how it is sorting in different orders in both 6i and 10g reports?
Thanks,
Ranz

Hi,
Please note the fact that 6i Reports is not certified to work with 10g Database. Hence it becomes impossible to address the sorting behavior of 6i Reports, though there is nothing different in the way it works. I would suggest you to use 10gR2 version of Reports services with 10g Database which is certified and supported. Thanks for your understanding.
Regards,
Anand

How can I sort in Numbers 3.0? All data are getting rolled around!

I wanted to sort column B
And that's the result.

Can't see the what's in the screenshot very well, but here's one way to sort in Numbers 3.0. The menu popped up after I clicked the triangle by D.
If you're sorting cells with formulas in them, here's a heads up that the sorting behavior has been changed from Numbers 2.3. It now closely matches the sorting behavior of Excel and other spreadsheets.
If you're trying to sort by more than one column, say first by Name then by RP then by LP, unfortunately Numbers 3.0 does not have that functionality built-in to the interface the way Numbers 2.3 did. But there's a fairly easy workaround. Set up a new column E and fill it with the formula =A&C&B, and then just sort by column E.
Here you seem to have numbers in B and C, in which case if you need a multicolumn sort your formula gets a little more involved because you have to pad the numbers with leading zeros so they sort correctly. This is easily done with something like this in column E: =A&RIGHT("00000"&C,4)&RIGHT("00000"&B,4) .
SG

Aperture Browser Sorts Not Working Correctly

There is a sorting anomaly (I think it's a bug) whereby Aperture does not sort fields correctly. I have a version naming scheme that starts with YYYYMMDD and Aperture does not sort the entire photo library correctly. For example, scanning through the browser I will get several pages of items sorted correctly, in my case, from oldest to newest, then it will show a bunch of photos out of order. For example, 2001 photos, 2008 photos, 2004 photos.
This is driving me nuts. I have repaired the library database to no avail. I have copied the version names and read them with a text editor to see if any obscure text - anybody else experience weird browser photo sorting behavior? The same anomaly exists if I sort by file name or if I sort by version name (most of my photos have same master file name as version name).

Here's a screen shot of some of the inconsistent sort results - sourced from "Photos" container...weird
This has been in existance for months. I thought I had resolved it when doing a bunch of consolidation stuff the past few days but now it is here again. Can't help but wonder if I have a corrupt database. I repaired the DB earlier today and Aperture added 10 photos to my Photos container - very weird. I have not taken the final step of rebuilding my database. Aperture has also started hanging on me in the past few hours - most recently while trying to update my Vault. I have about 9150 photos in total in my database.

Sorting Order - Urgent Help.....

Hi all,
I am doing migration from SQL Server 2K to Oracle 9.2.0.5.0.
I need to compare data from Oracle and SQL Server.
What is the default sorting behavior for Oracle? I mean I have a select statement like -
     Select <column> from <table>
This table doesnt have a primary key. It doesnt have an index also. It has two columns col1 is NUMBER and col2 is VARCHAR2 (50). When I retrieve data from Oracle it is sorting according to ROWID. As per my understanding ROWID is in the same order in which data was loaded in the table. In one case, I have found that ROWID is different from the data load order. My requirement is to order both Oracle data and SQL Server data so that I can compare them row by row. In absence of a key and an index what is the parameter based on which oracle sorts the data for a table?
I have NLS_SORT=BINARY and NLS_LANG=BINARY.
The result of a query 'select * from table1':
col1 col2
3 Unknown
3 CAN-seeking
3 Preclinical
3 Phase I
3 Phase II A
3 Phase II B
3 Phase III
3 Registration
3 Phase IV
4 Discovery
4 Unknown
4 CAN-seeking
4 Preclinical
4 Phase I
4 Phase II A
4 Phase II B
4 Phase III
4 Registration
1 Phase IV
4 Phase IV
5 Discovery
The result of 'Select * from table1 order by col1':
col1 col2
3 Unknown
3 CAN-seeking
3 Preclinical
3 Phase I
3 Phase II A
3 Phase II B
3 Phase III
3 Registration
3 Phase IV
4 Discovery
4 Unknown
4 CAN-seeking
4 Preclinical
4 Phase I
4 Phase II A
4 Phase IV
4 Phase II B
4 Phase III
4 Registration
5 Discovery
Can anybody help me on this....
Thanks in advance.....

Doesn't Oracle sort by ROWID by default? What is the order in which it fetches the results from the result set? I am really lost at this..... I have used this logic:
Sort by primary key, if it exists
Sort by first NUMBER column in absence of primary key.
However, the order from SQL Server and Oracle when sorted on col1 as in my explanation is different.
SQL Server uses SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS. The SQL Server result for -
'select * from table1 order by col2' is:
col1 col2
3     Unknown
3     CAN-seeking
3     Preclinical
3     Phase I
3     Phase II A
3     Phase II B
3     Phase III
3     Registration
3     Phase IV
4     Discovery
4     Unknown
4     CAN-seeking
4     Preclinical
4     Phase I
4     Phase II A
4     Phase II B
4     Phase III
4     Registration
4     Phase IV
5     Discovery
Thanks

Sort Order of Lookup Column

I have a list with look-up columns.
In particular, 'Market' is a look-up column, pulling the 'Title' column from a document library.
The issue I have is that the 'Market' look-up column contents are not listed in alphabetical order when selecting the menu to sort/filter, however, they are in alphabetical order
in the library they are being pulled from....
What controls the sort behavior of look-up column contents?
UPDATE: I have discovered that, by grouping the View by any column, the error disappears. Although this might be a work-around and provide context to an eventual solution, this is not a solution.
UPDATE 2: The key seems to be multi-value columns OR System Column (TYPE), require grouping to display sort order correctly.
Filtering by the type column (Type = xls ~ 7 items) does
NOT resolve the issue
Filtering by the type column (Type = xls ~ 7 items)
AND Grouping by
single-value lookup column (Year = 2012 ~4 items) does resolve the issue.
Filtering by a single-value lookup column (Year = 2012 ~ 1001 items) does resolve the issue
Filtering by a multi-value lookup column (Sector = Residential ~ 418 items) does
NOT resolve the issue
Filtering by a multi-value lookup column (Sector = Residential ~ 418 items)
AND Grouping by
single-value lookup column (Year = 2010 ~96 items) does resolve the issue.
- Rick

Here is a way that worked for me. I had a lookup column from a list to a document library. When I opened the form up it sorted by title. I created a new Data Connection in Infopath editing the list. When I created the Data connection
it gave me options which fields in the data connection and the ability to sort based on a field. I then just pointed my drop down list to point to the new data connection. This worked on ipad as well as IE9. No code required and my google
searching did not find this simple solution so putting here.

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]

Unpredictable sort behavior in generic Rowset pageflow?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for