add flip ordering batch process to category manager #11529

rdeutz · 2016-08-09T11:39:35Z

Pull Request for Issue #11103 .

This is not a real fix for the issue, but it is a way to make the B/C break not a big pain. In combination #11475 it allows sites that are using ordering to invert the ordering of articles with one click.

Summary of Changes

It adds a yes/no select to the batch process in the category manager to invert the ordering within categories.

Testing Instructions

Apply patch
You need a category view with articles
Set the the secondary ordering in Articles options to „Ordering Reverse“
Set the the secondary ordering for the menu to „Use Global“
Is is easier when you limit the view to one category and set leading 0, intro 20, columns 1, links 0
check the view and memorise the ordering
go to backend, select the category in the category manager and click on batch.
select yes under "Reverse the ordering of selected categories"
process
go to the frontend, the ordering should now inverted

Note: I have tested this with a category with 30000 articles and there was only a small delay.

Documentation Changes Required

Because this is a "fix" for a B/C break we should put at a prominent place in the release notes.

brianteeman · 2016-08-09T11:48:44Z

administrator/language/en-GB/en-GB.lib_joomla.ini

@@ -345,6 +345,7 @@ JLIB_HTML_ADD_TO_THIS_MENU="Add to this menu."
 JLIB_HTML_BATCH_ACCESS_LABEL="Set Access Level"
 JLIB_HTML_BATCH_ACCESS_LABEL_DESC="Not making a selection will keep the original access levels when processing."
 JLIB_HTML_BATCH_COPY="Copy"
+JLIB_HTML_BATCH_FLIPORDERING_LABEL="Reverse the ordering of selected categories"


Should this say reverse the order of articles in the selected categories?

oh yes, you are right, can you suggest a sentence to make it clear as possible

Reverse the ordering of all articles in the selected categories

@brianteeman

thanks @brianteeman

Sieger66 · 2016-08-09T18:02:58Z

This is not a good solution for the issue because:

If you have a site with for example 102 featured aticles and the article-ordering-numbers are for example:

-90
-80
1
2
3
...
99
100

and before your solution the featured articles came in the front-end in the same order.

After your solution and for example 2 new featured articles the order of the articles in front-end is:

102
101
100
99
98
...
3
2
1
-80
-90

First the new 2 articles then artcles in reverse oder and then the sticky-oder-articles in reverse order at last.

Sticky ordering is no longer possible and 102 articles now i must sort.

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/joomla-cms/11529.}

rdeutz · 2016-08-09T18:33:21Z

@Sieger66 This isn't for the featured article ordering it works only for the category ordering.

Sieger66 · 2016-08-09T19:07:31Z

But the issue is also by the featured articles!

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/joomla-cms/11529.}

rdeutz · 2016-08-09T19:12:13Z

yes, but let us solve one problem first an not mix problems, if we agree that here is working for categories we an easily add a flip ordering for featured articles. That's the reason I am writing test instruction to make clear what is this PR about.

ggppdk · 2016-08-09T19:57:59Z

aaaahhhh, how did i forget about the negative "sticky" ordering numbers ?

anyway since your reversing code uses 1 query per records

Split it in 2 parts

reverse positive ones
reverse negative ones moving them to -2147483648

-1 becomes -2147483648
-2 becomes -2147483647
-3 becomes -2147483646

the above is good for 32 bit / 64 bit / 128 bit , etc

Then the reverse ordering

will always typecast the "signed" ordering column in the listing queries, to unsigned for almost zero performance cost

and it works

you can continue to have sticky orderings by adding the new article that you want to be sticky at MAX(of negative orderings) + 1

Then we can enhance the drag and drop ordering to make use of it,
and we have back a very nice feature (sticky ordering),
that drag and drop ordering has removed

csthomas · 2016-08-09T20:53:52Z

IMHO sticky ordering, means special featured article can be wrapped by a module.
But I do not know if we can remove "sticky ordering" from articles and featured.

About performance.

Please test below queries on big tables when column ordering has an index key.

ALTER TABLE `#__content_frontpage` ADD INDEX ( `ordering` ) ;

Then compare two queries, you can use descibe to see how mysql use that.

This query does not use index key.

SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE *
FROM `#__content_frontpage`
ORDER BY CAST( ordering AS UNSIGNED ) DESC

vs

This query use index key and it is fast.

SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE *
FROM `#__content_frontpage`
ORDER BY ordering DESC

ggppdk · 2016-08-09T21:40:54Z

a union can be used to avoid the typecast

Sieger66 · 2016-08-09T22:55:14Z

@rdeutz :
Next problem with this solution:
If any website have a modul for example:

Extensions -> Modules -> New -> Articles - Category (This module displays a list of articles from one or more categories.) -> Ordering Options ->
Article Field to Order By is "Article Order" and
Ordering Direction is "Ascending"

then this Modul is list the articles in reverse direction with this solution.

Self Problem with other Extensions who use the ordering-numbers of articles.

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/joomla-cms/11529.}

csthomas · 2016-08-10T07:58:20Z

Yes this break B/C. Modules on J3.5.1 and lower works OK, but in J3.6 this is a mess.

IMHO for users the best way will be

Add button "Reverse Ordering" in categories (from this PR)

but reverse ordering should be use with where(state >= 0)

And merge PR Fix the ordering of articles and featured #11139.

After that we can back to MAX+1 for ordering in J4.

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/joomla-cms/11529.}

rdeutz · 2016-08-10T08:02:16Z

more and more I think about this, it seems to me that reverting the original PR that made the B/C break and then look at the performance problem is the way to go

ggppdk · 2016-08-10T08:12:16Z

Fixing the JTable reorder is something to be done anyway

now it does 1 query per record,

a PR had been proposed

but it was good only for mysql
that PR made the assumption that the articles already had a unique order number (thus it did not fix them if they did not have unique)

I proposed another PR should work in all dbs , addressing the performance issue as it does 1 DB update per 2000 or per 10000 records

it works in all DBs (may need some patching for ms sql)
it forces unique orderings as before

only it continues to have some medium memory requirements as existing re-order has ... if you try to re-order e.g. 20,000 records (but anyway large websites have memory limit 5x that what will be need, e.g. needed 40-50 MBs and they will have 256 MBs)

#11184
(just i need to rebase it and remove irrelevant changes from article model)

we could fix the JTable reorder performance and revert the change in using last order for new articles

also another reason to fix , JTable reorder performance is that it messing up reorder in large menus, due to race conditions in updating the table

csthomas · 2016-08-10T08:16:12Z

IMHO revert #8576 and add performance should be equal to PR #11139.

A few people complain about large ordering numbers
but it could be changed in templates to display more friendly values in the future.

Sticky ordering will still work. It is full B/C and performance good.

brianteeman · 2016-08-10T08:16:51Z

@rdeutz I think thats the only way

On 10 August 2016 at 09:12, Georgios Papadakis notifications@github.com
wrote:

Fixing the JTable reorder is something to be done anyway

now it does 1 query per record,

a PR had been proposed

but it was good only for mysql

that PR made the assumption that the articles already had a unique
order number (thus it did not fix them if they did not have unique)

I proposed another PR should work in all dbs , addressing the performance
issue as it does 1 DB update per 2000 or per 10000 records

it works in all DBs

it forces unique orderings as before

only it continues to have some medium memory requirements as existing
re-order has ... if you try to re-order e.g. 20,000 records

#11184 #11184
(just i need to rebase it and remove irrelevant changes from article model)

we could fix the JTable reorder performance and revert the change in using
last order for new articles

also another reason to fix , JTable reorder performance is that it
messing up reorder in large menu items, due to race conditions in updating
the table

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#11529 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABPH8VoN7YAA_xxXF_B8lGriPEuivysQks5qeYfjgaJpZM4Jf_G1
.

Brian Teeman
Co-founder Joomla! and OpenSourceMatters Inc.
http://brian.teeman.net/

ggppdk · 2016-08-10T08:23:51Z

In any case, JTable reorder performance needs to be addressed
regardless of what is decided on the new article orderings

about using large ordering numbers PR #11139 (it reverts #8576)
is not a bad option either (i have tested it)

csthomas · 2016-08-10T08:24:39Z

For reorder performance #11184 is also good, but I will have to test transaction like:

BEGIN

UPDATE ....
UPDATE ....
UPDATE ....

COMMIT

ggppdk · 2016-08-10T08:29:35Z

Even if you use transaction
why use multiple updates ?

e.g. 10000 updates instead of 4 updates ?

csthomas · 2016-08-10T08:34:44Z

Yes the big minus of my above is that php will have to send a lots of separated queries to sql server.

Then I vote to apply PRs #11139 + #11184 + #11529 (with sql where state >= 0)

#11529 may be helpful for users who start joomla from 3.6.

rdeutz · 2016-08-10T08:42:22Z

I have sent an email to the PLT list to vote on reverting #8576, I will let you know the result of the vote.

alikon · 2016-08-11T08:17:11Z

i 'll respectfully wait for PLT decision,
when we need to deal with perfomance, most of the times, is a trade off choice

gwsdesk · 2016-08-17T08:04:56Z

I hope wisdom prevails and that we indeed revert #8576 and sucessively look into the performance. Again as stated before:

IMHO under no circumstances can we ask people to manually re-arranged thousands of articles. I think it is wrong to "quickly" patch this issue with a solution that is not covering all options and is not well discussed nor using proper coding as I read the comments correct #11139. Once again I propose to PLT to revert this to J3.5.1 methods and after that we work on a proper solution that covers all ordering (featured/articles/categories/modules/ect

csthomas · 2016-08-17T08:21:36Z

With #11139 you do not need to do anything like manually re-arrange. Everything is automatically.
Only minus is large numbers in ordering column (~~which J3.6 does not display now~~).

Style of codding mainly has been corrected.

I have problem with explaining every detail in English.
but may be you can understand my explanation at https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/issues
/11103#issuecomment-235849244

gwsdesk · 2016-08-24T06:30:55Z

@rdeutz Any feedback on ?

I have sent an email to the PLT list to vote on reverting #8576, I will let you know the result of the vote.

rdeutz · 2016-08-24T06:33:32Z

@gwsdesk it is reverted

gwsdesk · 2016-08-24T06:47:02Z

Thanks the Lord ;-)

On 8/24/2016 1:33 PM, Robert Deutz wrote:

@gwsdesk https://github.com/gwsdesk it is reverted

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#11529 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHzLNr_i21-hW4vz_dd6CgRnVtKFZSGZks5qi-XGgaJpZM4Jf_G1.

brianteeman · 2016-09-06T13:27:59Z

@rdeutz as the offending PR has been reverted can this be closed?

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/joomla-cms/11529.}

rdeutz · 2016-09-06T13:34:32Z

The function is not bad at all so the question is will we have a possibility to flip the ordering in one go. It might to used not so often, but I have to fix the ordering on one site when I update to 3.6.3 and maybe other people need to do the same. Let us look if people test it and when it gets enough tests then it can go in.

gwsdesk · 2016-09-06T14:40:47Z

Robert
I missed one setting. Works like a charm indeed! (see proof http://gwsdev2.work/en/test)

gwsdesk · 2016-09-06T14:45:16Z

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on fc4f2ed

I missed one setting. Works like a charm indeed! (see proof http://gwsdev2.work/en/test)

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/joomla-cms/11529.}

mbabker · 2017-05-21T23:32:45Z

What's the status here?

rdeutz · 2017-05-22T05:45:51Z

I still thinks this makes sense as a function, it would need test to go in. But if nobody has really an interest it can be closed

ghost · 2017-05-28T06:17:45Z

@rdeutz Questions for "Test Instructions":

Set the the secondary ordering in Articles options to „Ordering Reverse“

didn't found this Setting, guess you mean (but theres no "Ordering Reverse"):

Set the the secondary ordering for the menu to „Use Global“

Global is set on "Ordering", Menu shows for Global:

carcam · 2017-06-03T21:00:42Z

I cannot follow the testing instructions:

Set the the secondary ordering in Articles options to „Ordering Reverse“
Is this in the category view menu item or in the com_content options? After applying the patch "Ordering reverse" is not showing in the dropdown. What am I missing @rdeutz ?
_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/11529.}

Sieger66 · 2017-07-18T17:01:13Z

@franz-wohlkoenig and @carcam

System -> Global Configuration -> Articles -> Shared -> Article Order -> Ordering Reverse

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/11529.}

ghost · 2017-07-20T12:28:00Z

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on fc4f2ed

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/11529.}

ghost · 2017-07-20T12:30:00Z

RTC after two successful tests in favor of resolving conflicting Files.

mbabker · 2017-07-25T23:51:22Z

@rdeutz This needs the merge conflict resolved then we can merge.

rdeutz · 2017-07-27T13:16:12Z

Solved merge conflicts, maybe someone can re-test @franz-wohlkoenig @gwsdesk @carcam

add flip ordering batch process to category manager

5549ae0

joomla-cms-bot added Language Change This is for Translators PR-staging labels Aug 9, 2016

rdeutz mentioned this pull request Aug 9, 2016

Fix the ordering of articles and featured #11139

Closed

brianteeman reviewed Aug 9, 2016
View reviewed changes

better wording

fc4f2ed

thanks @brianteeman

brianteeman removed the Language Change This is for Translators label Aug 9, 2016

joomla-cms-bot added the Language Change This is for Translators label Aug 9, 2016

joomla-cms-bot added the RTC This Pull Request is Ready To Commit label Jul 20, 2017

rdeutz added this to the Joomla 3.8.0 milestone Jul 21, 2017

rdeutz self-assigned this Jul 21, 2017

Merge branch 'staging' into add_reverse_ordering_batch

c0857f2

mbabker merged commit 3effc45 into joomla:staging Aug 4, 2017

joomla-cms-bot removed the RTC This Pull Request is Ready To Commit label Aug 4, 2017

rdeutz deleted the add_reverse_ordering_batch branch February 20, 2020 22:33

add flip ordering batch process to category manager #11529

add flip ordering batch process to category manager #11529

Conversation

rdeutz commented Aug 9, 2016 • edited by joomla-cms-bot

Summary of Changes

Testing Instructions

Documentation Changes Required

brianteeman Aug 9, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rdeutz Aug 9, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

brianteeman Aug 9, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Sieger66 commented Aug 9, 2016 • edited

rdeutz commented Aug 9, 2016

Sieger66 commented Aug 9, 2016

rdeutz commented Aug 9, 2016

ggppdk commented Aug 9, 2016 • edited

csthomas commented Aug 9, 2016

ggppdk commented Aug 9, 2016

Sieger66 commented Aug 9, 2016 • edited

csthomas commented Aug 10, 2016

rdeutz commented Aug 10, 2016

ggppdk commented Aug 10, 2016 • edited

csthomas commented Aug 10, 2016

brianteeman commented Aug 10, 2016

ggppdk commented Aug 10, 2016 • edited

csthomas commented Aug 10, 2016

ggppdk commented Aug 10, 2016

csthomas commented Aug 10, 2016

rdeutz commented Aug 10, 2016

alikon commented Aug 11, 2016

gwsdesk commented Aug 17, 2016 • edited

csthomas commented Aug 17, 2016 • edited

gwsdesk commented Aug 24, 2016

rdeutz commented Aug 24, 2016

gwsdesk commented Aug 24, 2016

brianteeman commented Sep 6, 2016

rdeutz commented Sep 6, 2016

gwsdesk commented Sep 6, 2016 • edited

gwsdesk commented Sep 6, 2016

mbabker commented May 21, 2017

rdeutz commented May 22, 2017

ghost commented May 28, 2017

didn't found this Setting, guess you mean (but theres no "Ordering Reverse"):

Global is set on "Ordering", Menu shows for Global:

carcam commented Jun 3, 2017

Sieger66 commented Jul 18, 2017

ghost commented Jul 20, 2017

ghost commented Jul 20, 2017

mbabker commented Jul 25, 2017

rdeutz commented Jul 27, 2017

rdeutz commented Aug 9, 2016 •

edited by joomla-cms-bot

Sieger66 commented Aug 9, 2016 •

edited

ggppdk commented Aug 9, 2016 •

edited

Sieger66 commented Aug 9, 2016 •

edited

ggppdk commented Aug 10, 2016 •

edited

ggppdk commented Aug 10, 2016 •

edited

gwsdesk commented Aug 17, 2016 •

edited

csthomas commented Aug 17, 2016 •

edited

gwsdesk commented Sep 6, 2016 •

edited