Odd glitch with Collection sorting after the last update

[BlazedMonkey 94]

As the title states, I noticed a rather odd glitch after the most recent update.  In Collections, typically the sorting has been done by the name of the collection, such as:

3 Men Collection

3 Ninjas Collection

28 Days/Weeks Later Collection

300 Collection

Ace Ventura Collection

etc.

 

 

After the .155 update, the sorting changed.  Instead of going by the collection name and sorting by that, as far as I could tell it was being sorted by the name of the first movie INSIDE the collection.  So I ended up with The Space Oddessey Series as the first collection in my collection list (2001: A Space Oddessey is the first movie in that collection).

 

I was able to fix it by changing the sorting to "Date Added" then immediately changing it back to sorting by "Name", but it had a couple of my users confused until I figured it out.

 

This ONLY happened on my Roku (logically since that was the only device that got an update), the nvidia shield and the web app displayed as normal.

Just figured you guys would want a heads up

[Luke 37046]

Hi there, thanks for the report. We'll take a look.

@@speechles

[speechles 1917]

Reference: Issue #328: [Collections] Odd sorting behavior

 

Have it on the tracker. Soon as we have time to chase this we will report back in this thread. Thanks for spotting the issue. Stay tuned..

[BlazedMonkey 94]

[ebr 14910]

I was able to fix it by changing the sorting to "Date Added" then immediately changing it back to sorting by "Name", but it had a couple of my users confused until I figured it out.

 

If that fixed it, then I'm guessing that this was just a bad sort order somehow saved from a previous version or beta.

 

Can anyone else reproduce this?

[BlazedMonkey 94]

Fwiw, this happened both on my roku locally, as well as 2 of my remote users Roku's.

[speechles 1917]

I think this might be one of those times with this issue... it is a feature not a bug.

 

In collections when you have not set a preference for sort. The web app doesn't send a sort order you just get semi random or it goes by name? It isn't going by sort name ascending when you first create a collection add to it and enter that collection it is something else.

 

The problem I had in the Roku app is on the panel that opens with * you have little indicators next to the Sort By and Sort Order selection items to tell which is being used. When this sort by/order isn't known the Roku app doesn't want to show nothing(no selector check) on Sort By and Sort Order selections. So I told it that it must assume we meant Sort By Name and Sort Order Ascending when it does not have a sort given to it in preferences. This lets the user have a known sort by/order. Without this the sort by/order returned is up-in-the-air cannot-be-determined <unknown>. That isn't acceptable to me... lol

 

This seemed a better thing to do and lets the user know how their media is actually being presented to them. That may be the difference here.

 

In the Roku app it is a feature (not a bug! ) that it is correcting this to a known sort and presenting you the option to correct to what you want.

 

@@Luke @@ebr is this the wrong thing to do?

 

Roku:

h t t p : / / 10.0.0.5:8096/emby/Users/cc2fcd37345242bba545beeb447cfdfa/Items?ImageTypeLimit=1

&EnableImageTypes=Primary,Thumb,Backdrop&SortBy=SortName&SortOrder=Ascending&fields=SortName,PrimaryImageAspectRatio&Ena

bleTotalRecordCount=true&ParentId=9d7ad6afe9afa2dab1a2f6e00ad28fa6

 

Web-App:

h t t p : / / 10.0.0.5:8096/emby/Users/cc2fcd37345242bba545beeb447cfdfa/Items?Fields=PrimaryImageAspectRatio,SortName,PrimaryImageAspectRatio&ImageTypeLimit=1&ParentId=9d7ad6afe9afa2dab1a2f6e00ad28fa6&SortBy=IsFolder,SortName&SortOrder=Ascending

 

 

is it the isFolder needed? Probably?

Edited April 5, 2019 by speechles

[BlazedMonkey 94]

[speechles 1917]

@@speechles Myself and one of my remote users use the collections all the time. I don't recall ever having to go in and change it, as they were already listed alphabetically by collection name. This changed suddenly with .155 update, and started sorting by the name of the first movie in the collection.

 

If it is going to change it to a "known sort" order, wouldn't it make the most sense to default to alphabetical by collection name? Otherwise you get a jumbled list that makes no logical sense until you start investigating, which doesn't really strike me as something I would want as a "feature"

 

That is what I am saying it does. If it sees you did not set a sort order it will default to sort name and ascending then set your preference accordingly so you have one ever after. So the Roku app as you use it sets your defaults as you use it. So if it gets messed up then something in that collection changed, or how the collection logic was handled on the server changed. We made no changes to this logic in app.

 

That is why I am saying it is weird that you have the issue because it would only happen if you set the default oddly that the Roku app cannot represent or the server did something odd. The app isn't requesting the isFolder to be set before SortName. That would make your folders smoosh into the rest of the titles alphabetically not float to front. It is that behavior I should instill by default so it doesn't do this smooshing. The Roku presently(it is a bug) does NOT put folders in front and sort by Sort Name/Ascending if no default found. It simply sorts by Sort Name/Ascending and smooshes folders and files together into the alphabet.

Edited April 5, 2019 by speechles

[ebr 14910]

In this specific case, all the items will be folders so that won't have any effect.  However, as a general rule, I'm not sure about if we should always have isFolder in front of an alpha sort.  I wouldn't think so...unless you are browsing by folder or in a photo library.

 

This really sounds like a previous (and bogus) sort order for that particular view was already saved and, once that got cleared out, everything is fine.

 

That's why I wanted to know if anyone else could reproduce it.

[speechles 1917]

If the setting carries across apps for each user. So my same view I use is presented on all apps by change 1 of the apps views.

 

But what if the app doesn't support the view you request?

 

This was an untested oversight when we built the poster grid of the Roku app. Collections on the web app do not allow sort by/order/filter but in the Roku app we allow it. This might need to be changed to match the web app as it doesn't allow it because obviously with folders these sorts would be incorrect based on media inside the container/folder.

 

So my theory is the Roku app was correct. Then they went to the web app and yes it shows it as alphabetical because that is how it rolls there. You cannot sort by/order/filter. Now you look at the Roku and it differs. It should have listed on Roku what order it was using and saved it as a default. It would then show different on the web app and the Roku because the Roku can display with that sort by/order/filter the web app cannot.

 

But I keep coming back to the you have to know the sort order if the Roku set it. It would tick the little check mark next to the selector that was showing. If it can't find a match it would show "SortName" "Ascending" and force the sort to become that.

 

So this one has me stumped how.. why.. where it would do this?

Edited April 5, 2019 by speechles

[ebr 14910]

The web app has sort and filter for the Collections view...

 

We are talking about the grid of Collections, not the contents of any specific collection...

[speechles 1917]

The web app has sort and filter for the Collections view...

 

We are talking about the grid of Collections, not the contents of any specific collection...

 

If it is the grid inside the collections that can only happen on out-of-range preference. Something any other app has the Roku doesn't (such as Folders/LastEpisodeDateAdded). This may/could/will look different because if the Roku notices it doesn't have that view it will default to SortName. I did that to always have the panel show the correct indicators next to each selection in the options panel. I am guessing there is nothing more to see here really that this was a fluke. *crosses fingers*

 

[side note]: We need LastEpisodeDateAdded on the poster grid selector when the type is series. Hidden on everything else. So the panel will need dynamic adjustment to move the panel up a few pixels and make it longer. Then add in the new sortBy field and move the other translations for sort order and filters down. This is possible too. I can put this on the tracker as I see it missing.

Edited April 5, 2019 by speechles

[ebr 14910]

if the Roku notices it doesn't have that view it will default to SortName.

 

 

We don't want to do that.  In some instances (like the contents of a collection) we want to let the server decide the proper order by not requesting a specific sort.

[skidmarks 188]

@@ebr

 

Just checked (forgot to see which version i am currently running, beta).  Collections sorted correctly.

Edited April 5, 2019 by skidmarks

[speechles 1917]

We don't want to do that.  In some instances (like the contents of a collection) we want to let the server decide the proper order by not requesting a specific sort.

 

It isn't changing the sort when it gets a view it doesn't know. It just isn't marking it with a selector then. That is what I meant. Before it would mark like it was by name when it wasn't. It would default to show ascending when it wasn't known. Now for these unknowns you just see no selection for Sort By/Sort Order and the sentence at the top of poster grid won't give any clues what is going on either. Because it isn't known.

 

Now if you see a selection that is really what it is. In lack of a selection showing for sort by/sort order that means the app never got told what it was or did and we can't show that because we don't have that option. In that case it will show an empty selection too.

Edited April 5, 2019 by speechles

[BlazedMonkey 94]

So this is one of my remote users.  I just recently set them up about a month ago. They hadn't used Emby yet, so literally nothing settings-wise was changed with the collections defaults, from a fresh install on Roku (no clue what the version number was) a month ago, to the recent update to .155 a few days ago.  The collections were alphabetical by collection name on the previous install, then after the update, they went to this:

 

Edited April 8, 2019 by BlazedMonkey

[ebr 14910]

If you look in the metadata manager for one of those collections, does it have a Sort Title defined?

[BlazedMonkey 94]

If you look in the metadata manager for one of those collections, does it have a Sort Title defined?

Nope

[ebr 14910]

Without changing anything and while that sort is still happening like that, can you send a log from the app?

[BlazedMonkey 94]

Without changing anything and while that sort is still happening like that, can you send a log from the app?

I'll be over there this evening, I can do it then.

[BlazedMonkey 94]

Log sent at 5:17pm CST, user name pm'ed to @@ebr

[ebr 14910]

Okay, in this case, there is no sort order being requested so they are coming back in whatever the default sort is from the server.

 

Once you manually set the sort to something, it then works fine from then on out, correct?

[BlazedMonkey 94]

Okay, in this case, there is no sort order being requested so they are coming back in whatever the default sort is from the server.

If that were the case, then why doesn't it match the web app, and the shield, that show the correct 'alphabetical by collections name' sort? Do the web app and shield not pull the sort order from the server as well? Also, why did this suddenly change with the .155 update, when it was working correctly before? Was something changed that affected this?

 

Once you manually set the sort to something, it then works fine from then on out, correct?

Yes

[ebr 14910]

The other apps are probably forcing a sort by name - or you simply had selected a specific sort in that app before.  We don't do that because, if nothing is defined, we assume the server will deliver the proper default and don't want to assume that is by name.