I've created a multivariate test, but the values are stuck at zero. To make these values go up in accordance with my users' behavior when they convert, I have to do something I haven't done yet, and no documentation I can find describes just what this is.
I've tried configuring a goal with a rule of "item ID is equal to (some goal page's item ID)" and set the points value to eg. 1 or 5. But when I visit the page in a browser, the values on my test stay stuck stubbornly on zero.
Is there something I'm not doing?
This is most likely caused by the Test Statistics cache. It is set by default to 1 hour expiration time. To see your results instantly simply change the setting in the web.config to:
<setting name="WebEdit.TestStatisticsCacheExpiration" value="00:00:00" />
Related
I'm attempting to set up an OpenCart store for a client.
I'm getting the following error on the shipping page.
"Warning: No Shipping options are available. Please contact us for assistance!"
Research suggests that this error happens when there is a mismatch between the weight-class for the store and for the plugin, or something similar.
I've tried every combination of configuration settings that I can think of without result.
I'm not familiar enough with OpenCart to debug this issue. Where do I need to start looking?
Firstly you have to enable the shipping status and the values from admin panel shipping tab.After that you can get it in the front end.
My troubleshooting procedure:
The store weight UOM had been set to ounces.
The Fedex plugin doesn't support ounces as a weight UOM.
Nothing works.
The store weight UOM was changed to LBS.
Nothing works.
The package size was set to FedEx 10 KG Box
The Fedex plugin can't convert from Lbs to KG on the fly.
The package size was changed to "Fedex Box", without a weight class
Some products now working, all shipping estimates are WAY high.
When changing the default UOM for the store, no existing weights are converted in to the new units, although any weights stored without a unit are now read as being in the new unit.
This meant that the fedex system was trying to pull prices for items that "weighed" hundred of ounces (which it should have been able to do, even though those weights were incorrect.)
I updated the weights on all products to be in line with their unit of measure
At this point, the plugin was working for most, but not all, products, with reasonable accuracy.
I changed the plugin settings from List Rate to Account rate.
Now everything works.
To simplify - The fedex shipping plugin in opencart 1.5.6 will only work if:
All the products in the system have their weights stored in the same UOM.
That UOM is either pounds or kilograms (not ounces!)
A geozone is set, and a zip code is supplied(zip codes are important!)
The package size matches the unit of measure for the weight (no mixing kilograms and pounds!)
The product weights are actually correct
The account in question has a rate for a package of the indicated size
Hopefully someone else will find this helpful.
Ive been through this problem as well and I haven't yet fixed it completely.
But in my particular problem, I had a syntax error in the XML retrieved by the Fedex server after the cURL request.
Printing the $response variable I could find some good hints about some of the problems, for example, commas (,) instead of dots (.) to refer to decimal numbers and decimal numbers where it was expecting an integer.
So var_dump($response) could help some people find their specific issues.
I am working on a sitecore site rev 120706 DMS and main.
We are adding personas to some pages and getting unusual results with fractional values when we try to add to them using the Score(string, float) method. we have a value lead which is 0.5 due to two profiles being added to an earlier page one with a value of 1 and another with a value of 0. On a form submission we want to add one to the value and use Profile.Score("lead", 1) which replaces the .5 with a 1 instead of adding 1 to get 1.5 . When the value is 1 we are successfully getting 2.
How can we get the Score method to react in a consistent matter?
Sitecore apparently has an issue in their code with it using int.Parse instead of float.Parse
I've found place in the code where the error appears. It's in the
Sitecore.Analytics.Data.VisitProfile.Parse() method. It uses int.Parse
instead of float.Parse while reading profile values from database.
This issue was fixed in Sitecore 6.6.0 Update-4. Please see reference
number 376088 in release notes. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to
fix the code. Please consider upgrading your solution to 6.6.0
Update-4. In the meantime I would suggest to use larger score values
in your profiles, so that resulting value is always be greater than 1.
This approach works on my side. Please let us know in case you have
any troubles with that.
To resolve the issue ended up just multiplying the values we were using by 10 to avoid sitecore's int as opposed to float issue.
We’re using JCo 3.0 to connect to RFCs and read data from SAP R/3. We use one RFC RFC_READ_TABLE often and use a second custom RFC to read employee information. My questions revolve around a third RFC RSAQ_REMOTE_QUERY_CALL. I'm calling an ad-hoc query I built in SAP using this RFC but I’m not getting the expected results. The main problem is that it appears that SAP is ignoring one of my selection criteria and using what was saved in SAP when I originally built it. The date criterion stored in my ad-hoc is 6/23/2013. If I pass in 6/28/2013 from JCo, I get the same results as if I had passed 6/23/2013 from JCo.
We have built several ad-hoc queries whose only criteria is a personnel number and call them successfully using RFC RSAQ_REMOTE_QUERY_CALL.
Background on my ad-hoc query: reporting period of today, joining together four aspects of an employee’s information: their latest action (hire, rehire, etc.), organization (e.g. company), pay (e.g. pay scale level) and communication (e.g. email). The query will run every workday.
Here are my questions:
My ad-hoc has three selection criteria. The first two are simple strings. The third is a date. The date will vary each time the query runs. We are referencing the first criteria using SP$00001, the second with SP$00002 and the third with SP$00003. The order of the criteria changes from the ad-hoc to SQ01 (what was SP$00001 in the ad-hoc is now SP$00003). Shouldn’t we reference them in the order defined in the ad-hoc (e.g. SP$00001)?
The two simple string selections are using OPTION “EQ”. The date criteria is using OPTION GT (greater than). Is “GT” correct?
We have some limited accessibility to SAP. Is there a way to see which SP$ parameters are mapped to which criteria?
If my ad-hoc was saved with five criteria but four of them never change when I call the ad-hoc from JCo, do I just need to set the value of the one or do I need to set the other four as well?
Do I have to call this ad-hoc using a variant (function.getImportParameterList().setValue(“VARIANT”, “VARIANT_NAME”))?
Does the Reporting Period have an impact on the date criteria? I have tried changing the Reporting Period to be PNPBEGDA = today and PNPENDDA = today and noticed no change.
Is there a way in SAP to get a “declaration” of your ad-hoc (name, inputs, outputs, criteria)? I have looked at JCoFunction.toXml() and JCoFunctionTemplate. These are good if you want to see something at runtime before it goes to SAP, but I’m looking for something I can use on the JCo end to help me write Java code that matches the ad-hoc.
I have looked at length on the web for answers to my questions and have not found anything that is useful. If there is anything which would help me, please let me know.
Thanks,
LM
Since I don't know much about SQnn, I won't be able to answer all of your questions...
I don't know, sorry.
It should be, at least it's the usual operator for greater than.
Yes - set an external breakpoint right inside the function module and trace its execution while performing the RFC call. Warning: At least basic ABAP knowledge required.
I don't know, sorry.
I don't know either, sorry.
That would depend on the query, I suspect...
JCo won't be able to help you out there - it doesn't know about queries, it only knows function modules. There might be other RSAQ_* function modules to get that information though.
I played with setting up a variant in SQ01 for my query. I added some settings in the variant that solved my problem and answered several of my questions in my post. The main thing I did was add a dynamically calculated date as part of my criteria. Here's how:
1. In SQ01, access menu "Go To" -> "Maintain Variants".
2. Choose your variant and in subobjects, choose "Attributes" and click "Change".
3. In the displayed list, find your date criterion.
4. Choose "D" in Selection Variable, choose a comparison option (mine was GT for greater than), and a "Name of a Variable" (really, this is the type of dynamic date calculation you need).
5. Go back to the Subobjects panel, choose "Values" and click "Change".
6. Enter any other criteria you need in the "Program selections" section.
7. Save the variant.
By doing this, I don't need to pass anything into the query from JCo. Also, SAP will automatically update the date criteria you entered in step #4 above.
So to to answer my questions from my original post:
1 and 4. It doesn't matter because I'm no longer passing anything in from JCo.
2. "GT" is Greater Than.
3 and 7. If anyone knows, I'd really like to find out.
5. Use the name you as it is in SAP (step #2 above).
6. I still don't know, but it's not holding me up.
I'm posting this in case anyone out there needs this type of information. Thanks to Esti and vwegert for helping me out.
If I search for Authorname "Title of Work" the records don't come up, but if I search for "Title of Work" Authorname then they do.
Why might this happen?
This is solr running on Coldfusion. The only change is the order of the terms.
Update
Sample coldfusion code. Note that in this example first one gets 2 matches while the second one gets 1. So it looks like this changes depending on the actual string searched, but it still means that changing the order of terms changes the number of records returned.
I could understand it changing the order of records returned, since changing the order would change the relevance of the results. But all 3 records should show up for either one. I'll see if I can find the solr logs and post them, that might help.
<cfset term1='"globalization of information"'>
<cfset term2='Reiter'>
<cfsearch name="ExampleOne" criteria='#term1# #term2#' collection="abstracts,fulltexts">
<cfoutput>#ExampleOne.recordcount#</cfoutput>
<cfsearch name="ExampleTwo" criteria='#term2# #term1#' collection="abstracts,fulltexts">
<cfoutput>#ExampleTwo.recordcount#</cfoutput>
<cfabort>
Output:
2 1
Just try giving search term in single quotes, I have tested in on CF 10 and it is working fine for me.
So Instead of:
cfset term1='"globalization of information"'
try this
cfset term1="'globalization of information'"
I've had a query that has been running fine for about 2 years. The database table has about 50 million rows, and is growing slowly. This last week one of my queries went from returning almost instantly to taking hours to run.
Rank.objects.filter(site=Site.objects.get(profile__client=client, profile__is_active=False)).latest('id')
I have narrowed the slow query down to the Rank model. It seems to have something to do with using the latest() method. If I just ask for a queryset, it returns an empty queryset right away.
#count returns 0 and is fast
Rank.objects.filter(site=Site.objects.get(profile__client=client, profile__is_active=False)).count() == 0
Rank.objects.filter(site=Site.objects.get(profile__client=client, profile__is_active=False)) == [] #also very fast
Here are the results of running EXPLAIN. http://explain.depesz.com/s/wPh
And EXPLAIN ANALYZE: http://explain.depesz.com/s/ggi
I tried vacuuming the table, no change. There is already an index on the "site" field (ForeignKey).
Strangely, if I run this same query for another client that already has Rank objects associated with her account, then the query returns very quickly once again. So it seems that this is only a problem when their are no Rank objects for that client.
Any ideas?
Versions:
Postgres 9.1,
Django 1.4 svn trunk rev 17047
Well, you've not shown the actual SQL, so that makes it difficult to be sure. But, the explain output suggests it thinks the quickest way to find a match is by scanning an index on "id" backwards until it finds the client in question.
Since you said it has been fast until recently, this is probably not a silly choice. However, there is always the chance that a particular client's record will be right at the far end of this search.
So - try two things first:
Run an analyze on the table in question, see if that gives the planner enough info.
If not, increase the stats (ALTER TABLE ... SET STATISTICS) on the columns in question and re-analyze. See if that does it.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/planner-stats.html
If that's still not helping, then consider an index on (client,id), and drop the index on id (if not needed elsewhere). That should give you lightning fast answers.
latests is normally used for date comparison, maybe you should try to order by id desc and then limit to one.