Conversation in IRC. tl;dr - it looks like it might be a GUI related
problem since the API does contain all of the datasets. Carl - any
chance you have an idea of what is going on here?
21:20 < jmchilton> avowinkel: is it possible there were duplicated
identifiers (has your discover_datasets pattern
changed from earlier)
21:21 < jmchilton> I'm leaning toward saying it is likely a backend
problem - since explicit output collections are
pretty new and you are the first person I can think
of really exercising them strenuously
21:21 < jmchilton> One way to verify though is to check the API - if
you just open localhost:<port>/api/histories
in your browser - find the history id
21:21 < jmchilton> then open /api/histories/<history_id>/contents and
then find the collection
21:22 < jmchilton> you should be able to open something like
21:22 < jmchilton>
which should show the
21:23 < avowinkel> there are defenitely no duplicate designations - if
thats the same like identifiers
21:23 < avowinkel> It's still <discover_datasets
pattern="__name_and_ext__" directory="splits" />
21:27 < jmchilton> My next question would be (if you can verify it is
a backend thing) - are the elements in the
dataset - the hidden elements less than a certain
HID - or are they random.
21:28 < avowinkel> via the api all 96 entries are in the collection
21:29 < avowinkel> with element_index's 0 to 95, in total 96
21:29 < avowinkel> in both lists
21:31 < avowinkel> biggest hid is 202
21:32 < avowinkel> the parent's list hid is always smaller than the
containing element's hids
22:26 < jmchilton> so you are sure every element_index from 0 to 95 is
represented? This being a GUI problem is
really odd - but it seems like it probably is. I
wonder if someone a div id is generated from
the identifiers in such a way that one is
duplicated. Seems unlikely
22:27 < avowinkel> well. I did grep element_index, I saw index 0 on
the top, Index 95 on the bottom. and wc -l
gives 96 - so yes. very sure
22:28 < avowinkel> and when I scan loosely through the list of greps,
I don't see anything odd
22:29 < avowinkel> don't want to count from 0 to 95 ^^
22:29 < jmchilton> :)
22:29 < avowinkel> for all the tests
22:30 < jmchilton> does that API response have a hidden field for the datasets?
22:31 < avowinkel> there is nothing in that file that matches "hidden"
22:31 < avowinkel> (in the history they are all hidden)
22:32 < jmchilton> I would open your web browser and check for
22:34 < avowinkel> nop. nothing (Firefox 34 - ubuntu biolinux)
22:34 < jmchilton> can you send me a screenshot of the expanded collection?
22:35 < avowinkel> the newest run has 69 entries in the history
22:36 < avowinkel> what part do you want screenshotted?
22:38 < jmchilton> "When I open the list, I just can see 64 items."
The opened list in the history panel
22:40 < avowinkel> http://snag.gy/2knoI.jpg
22:43 < jmchilton> are you hand counting these lists in the browswer then?
22:47 < avowinkel> yes, hand counting
22:50 < jmchilton> I'll ping carl about this - he is the GUI
mastermind - he might have some clue
22:59 < avowinkel> jmchilton: http://pastebin.com/DcpF1QAU
22:59 < mrscribe> Title: [YAML] galaxy dataset_collection contents -
Pastebin.com (at pastebin.com)
23:00 < avowinkel> don't get confused: On the picture is a different
dataset. It doesn't have "sample_" in the name
23:04 < jmchilton> yeah - that response looks perfectly fine - really odd
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Alexander Vowinkel
> Hi Team,
> my tool creates dynamically 96 datasets bundled into a list.
> In the history I can see the number 96 in the top as hidden datasets
> (6 shown, 96 hidden)
> When I open the list, I just can see 64 items.
> Now I run the job again and I have 96 more hidden items.
> I open the new list and can see 66 items in that new list.
> What is going on here?
> Is that "just" a visual bug?
> Or are my datasets affected?
> PS: I use postgres
> Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
> in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this
> and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:
> To search Galaxy mailing lists use the unified search at:
Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:
To search Galaxy mailing lists use the unified search at: