cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Sub-class objects changing lovu2019s in XI 3.0

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello all,

I have a XI 3.0 universe where I have several classes and sub-classes like this;

Class1

....Subclass1

.............Object 1

.............Object 2

.............Object 3

....Subclass2

.............Object 4

.............Object 5

.............Object 6

...Subclass3

.............Object 7

.............Object 8

.............Object 9

Class2

....Subclass1b

.............Object 10

.............Object 11

.............Object 12

While updating the objects lovu2019s (for sorting) in the properties window, Iu2019ve noticed that beginning with Object 4 that the lovu2019s are changing back to that of Object 1, this is also the case for Object 5 (changes to Object 2u2019s lov) all the way through Object 12. It seems that no mater how often I set and apply the sorted lov for all objects, they take on the settings of the objects in the first sub-class in my universe. When querys are ran from WebIntelligence, they display the correct SQL (and return no results as there is no data in my dev database as yet). Objects in other classes (not sub-classes) seem to be fine. Has anyone seen this type of behavior before?

Iu2019m thinking that I will need to go to 3.1 and suspect this may be a bug, any thoughts or comments are appreciated....

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (1)

Answers (1)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

Did you copy some objects from a given subclass to another subclass?

I noticed in previous BOE versions that LOVs always refer to the object used for copy.

This is a known bug and I don't know yet if it has been fixed.

Didier

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Didier,

I did copy some some of the objects from a subclass to another, and to make sure this was not the issue, I re-created new ones and had the same issue. I was not aware that previous BOE versions (LOVs) had the issue though, which makes some sense.

At the moment, I'm suspecting this is a bug so I am asking the client to upgrade to 3.1 to see if the issue persist (I suspect it may), if so I will then open up a tech support case.

Thanks, Joe Szabo