I am experiencing problems with content which is generated using auto slots.
The auto slots in this instance are used on hub pages to generate a set of links to generic pages. The relationship between the pages is established by both the hub page and generic page have the same box(es) ticked in a check box tree.
What I am finding is that every time a hub page is revised, a duplicate set of links to the generic pages are generated. So for example if there are 5 links when the hub page is first created, there would then be 10 links after the first revision, 15 after the second and so on.
The query I have in one of the slots is as follows.
select rx:displaytitle, rx:sys_contentid, rx:sys_revisionid from rx:contentTypeName where rx:fieldName =:bindingVariable order by rx:displaytitle
Any suggestions on what this issue could be please?
Thanks and regards
Try removing the reference to the revision in the select clause.
The recommended practice for AutoSlot queries is to include only the content id and folder id in the select.
In JCR Queries (unlike standard SQL) you can sort by properties that are not in the select list.
Implemetation guide (6.5.2) states that rx:sys_revisionid must be included.
The documentation is wrong here. In 6.5 and later, the revision comes from the Item Filter, not the query, so including the revision won’t add anything.
I’ve asked the doc team to add this to their list.
As for the original problem, I tested executing a JCR query (via the test JSP) on an item with multiple revisions, and it only returns the current revision. I don’t know if this holds true for an actual autoslot or not.
Thanks very much for the responses.
I have tried as suggested and this has not made any difference to the results appearing on the page.
I have also done a test on an item with multiple revisions and found it only returns the current revision. Any explanation as to why the same thing does not happen for my auto slots?
Thanks and regards
Anyone able to help with this please?
Apologies for bumping this up.
What you’ve described sounds very ordinary to me, and it works in all the examples I’ve ever seen.
Have you tried removing the “order by” clause and/or hardcoding the binding variable? Do these things change the behaviour at all?
Tell us what other things you’ve tried, as well.