Problem with "Places" usage

[Roger Kreuz]

Reunion 10 looks very good so far -- thank you, Leister!

In my 88,000 person family file, I'm having a weird problem with a particular place. According to the "find" command, the town of Bliesen (Germany) is associated with nearly 7,000 of my individuals. Since I've cited it so frequently, I have usually just entered the town's name by itself. However, in "places," Reunion 10 reports that *no* events use this place! Multi-word forms of the town's name (e.g., "Bliesen, Germany," and "Bliesen, Rheinland, Prussia") return the correct number of usage events. I have over 9,600 place names in my family file, and after performing extensive spot checks, it appears that this is the *only* place that yields nothing in terms of usage. (I believe that it's also the most frequent place name in my file.)

I've waited until the first maintenance update to report this, since it's not a major problem. However, the same result occurs with 10.0.1 as with 10.0.0. I'm running OS 10.6.8 on a couple of different Macs, and have tried converting my Reunion 9 file on both of them, but the exact same issue occurs. Is anyone else seeing something like this?

[Kathy C]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

I, too, have a problem with the Usage in the Places List. It seems that, no matter what place I select from the List, when I click on Usage and it shows events that use that place, I click on those people/events and they do NOT use that place ...... but they DO use the place just below on the Place List. An example would be:

1) Select the Place: Calistoga, Napa County, California, United States
2) Usage shows one person that uses that location for an event
3) Clicking on that person reveals NO usage of the Calistoga place
4) This person DOES use the next place down on the Place List which is Cambellsville, , Kentucky, United States
5) Upon asking Reunion to map places for this person, it does correctly map the proper location

I did not notice this behavior in version 10. I am running version 10.0.1 of Reunion.

[Nick]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

Same here. Also in the list of places, there appeared some "occupations". When I looked at the people involved, there was a new field in their card "New/Occ" or something like that. In some cases the original occupation field had been blanked. I copied the occupation from the "new" field to the usual old one and deleted the "new" field. All seems OK now...

[Keith Bage]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

I too am now having problems with places usage.

I've been tidying up my places and this morning edited the name of a number places. These places now no longer show any usage of them. However if I do a find anything for the place name I do find it being used.

Furthermore, the changed places no longer show a menu option to geo code them even though they have no geo code and have not been "skipped".

This seems to be an obvious bug.

I'm using 10.0.1

[Gregg]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

...problem with a particular place. According to the "find" command, the town of Bliesen (Germany) is associated with nearly 7,000 of my individuals.
...Reunion 10 reports that *no* events use this place!

It looks like you ran into a situation where the usage list malfunctions in cases where a particular place has been used in a large number of entries (several thousand instances). We will address this in the next free update.

Could you send us a copy of your family file so that we can take a closer look at this.

[Gregg]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

...when I click on Usage and it shows events that use that place, I click on those people/events and they do NOT use that place ...... but they DO use the place just below on the Place List.

Kathy,

Are you still seeing this every time you display the Places in the sidebar, or just once in a while?

If you see it every time, can you send us a copy of your family file. If it just happens once in a while, can you let us know what kind of things you were doing in Reunion before it started happening.

Thanks.

[Gregg]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

...there appeared some "occupations". When I looked at the people involved, there was a new field in their card "New/Occ" or something like that. In some cases the original occupation field had been blanked.

Nick,

Can you take a look at your old Reunion 9 family file to see if the occupation for the person in question was correct or if something went wrong during the upgrade.

Thanks.

[fjvanbodegom]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

In Holland we have a few genealogy programms, like Aldfaer and Haza21 (might be others too), that treat an occupation as an Event, with a date and a place.
So when importing a gedcom with an occupation 'defined as an event field', it is possible that occupation is listed in the events under Places.

[Keith Bage]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

Just found the cause of my issue with places which was Dropbox related, nothing to do with Reunion

[Roger Kreuz]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

It looks like you ran into a situation where the usage list malfunctions in cases where a particular place has been used in a large number of entries (several thousand instances). We will address this in the next free update.

Could you send us a copy of your family file so that we can take a closer look at this.

Gregg-

Thanks for your reply. I've sent the file to help@leisterpro.com.

-Roger Kreuz

[Harvey Researcher]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

Ummm. I've converted my file, and unfortunately it appears that alot of my places references contain street addresses, and not just towns, counties and countries etc

Eeek

[Gregg]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

Ummm. I've converted my file, and unfortunately it appears that alot of my places references contain street addresses, and not just towns, counties and countries...

This is not a problem with Reunion 10 or the upgrade. In older versions of Reunion, you could put anything into a place field. In Reunion 10, you can still put anything in a place field. If you're seeing street addresses after converting to Reunion 10, it means the street addresses were entered in an earlier version.

[Nick]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

Nick,
Can you take a look at your old Reunion 9 family file to see if the occupation for the person in question was correct or if something went wrong during the upgrade.

Gregg, my old file was definitely OK, and something happened during the upgrade. Luckily I was able to compare the upgraded file with my website pages. It was consequently relatively easy to correct. I don't see any other users complaining of this, which is strange...

[LyndaCook]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

Gregg, my old file was definitely OK, and something happened during the upgrade. Luckily I was able to compare the upgraded file with my website pages. It was consequently relatively easy to correct. I don't see any other users complaining of this, which is strange...

I found the same issue, as the first thing I did with v10 was a clean-up of the places. I knew I had some inconsistencies in my db and wanted to clean them up prior to a trip to England, as I want to visit some of the places my ancestors came from.

If you review places, it is so easy to identify the errors that I didn't bother posting.

[Nick]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

I found the same issue, as the first thing I did with v10 was a clean-up of the places. I knew I had some inconsistencies in my db and wanted to clean them up prior to a trip to England, as I want to visit some of the places my ancestors came from.

If you review places, it is so easy to identify the errors that I didn't bother posting.

This is true, at least as far as inconsistencies are concerned. Buggy issues, like an occupation turning up in the place list, are a little more sinister.