|
If someone's gonna advertise a product, this is the sort of thing I'd much rather see.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorting objects in blob containers in Storage Explorer is a joke.
I have several thousand files in one container with Last Modified dates ranging from 6/3/2022 through 6/7/2022, and I need to delete all but those dated 6/7. I "sorted" them by the Last Modified date, ascending, and the first 100 cached items have dates of 6/3 and 6/4. I delete them, and after a few minutes the next 100 items are shown. There shouldn't be any more files from 6/3, but half of these are 6/3 files. I delete them, and rinse and repeat. Same date ranges, different files, dated 6/3 and 6/4.
This tool is better than nothing, but not by much.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
This sounds like it is similar to a problem I encountered with Oracle some years ago (10+ years?).
In the previous version of Oracle (7 or 8?), a statement like
(my Oracle SQL syntax is rusty, so this may be incorrect)
SELECT TOP 1000 Surname
FROM Employees
ORDER BY Surname gave an alphabetical list of 1000 surnames starting at A and going as far as (say) C; but the next version (10?) gave an alphabetical list of 1000 surnames not necessarily starting with A and not necessarily ending with C. I spotted it, because my name used to appear in the answer, but then stopped appearing.
The reason (I worked out) was that the old version did the ORDER BY first, then the TOP 1000 (so they were pre-sorted then truncated); and the new version did the TOP 1000 first, then did the ORDER BY (so they were sorted after truncation meaning that you got a random sample). Both are - as I understand it - valid results from the SQL statement, but the difference upset a lot of people (including myself) who thought that they had been eliminated and not told about it.
My solution, to get my preferred old-style list, was something like
(again, my Oracle SQL is rusty)
SELECT TOP 1000 Surname
FROM
(
SELECT Surname
FROM Employees
ORDER BY Surname
)I don't think that your description fits that scenario; but could the caching have unsorted the data? Bad design if that is what had happened.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, working with blobs like that is a drag.
I don't really work with blobs outside of my code anymore.
I can delete all or a few manually, but for that kind of work I write a quick console application that does the work for me 
Luckily I rarely do that kind of stuff, it's mostly a few 
|
|
|
|
|
UPDATE:
I've received several helpful suggestions and have tried most of them.. I have been working with several members of the helpdesk team for a few weeks now. I will be receiving a fresh laptop TODAY. Lets see what happens with the new one.
Note: not a request for help, however comments/suggestions always appreciated.
<background>The company I work for is forcing this update onto my company owned laptop. This specific update messes with my network connection somewhere within the router/modem with the result that my connection will stay up for about 1 minute, then disconnect. This results in the system being unusable as I heavily rely on the connection.
<rant>I can roll back the update, however, the company keeps forcing the update, resulting in several hours wasted each week. I cannot stop the forced update, just wait till it is done, the roll back. UGH!!
I've been working remotely with the IT team and they've decided to ship a fresh laptop with the update installed. Here's hoping THAT one works.
modified 9-Jun-22 10:52am.
|
|
|
|
|
Are you using WiFi? Only because similar issues have been reported for WiFi.
Me personally did not face problems after upgrading W10 to 20H2, but also not using WiFi.
|
|
|
|
|
I am apparently the only one with the issue within the company.
The issue occurs both with WiFi and Ethernet cable.
I also have several other devices (other laptops. tables, phones, IoTs) connected without issues.
Thanks for asking.
|
|
|
|
|
I assume you did that allready... Google for '20h2 network disconnect'. There are several suggestions (also non WiFi related), maybe you have luck with one of them.
|
|
|
|
|
richwfowler wrote: they've decided to ship a fresh laptop with the update installed
Sounds like a rather drastic solution.
Have you tried a separate, cheap USB wifi dongle as a replacement?
...but hey, if you can get a newer laptop out of it...sounds a win-win situation to me.
|
|
|
|
|
It isn't a WiFi issue, I get the same errors when connected via ethernet cable.
I've already lost several days work trouble shooting this. The idea is that hopefully, the new laptop from a fresh image will work properly, then I can "at my leisure", transfer my working environment with minimal down time.
|
|
|
|
|
This sounds like a network hardware driver problem. You might investigate using Device Manager and look for the latest-and-greatest driver from the manufacturer. It's possible part of the 20H2 update is replacing your old driver with one that doesn't work properly with your chip set. A newer driver would probably be left in place.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
We did that as well. Thanks for the suggestion.
|
|
|
|
|
The EU Parliament is expected to pass a rule requiring a single small device connector. This will apply to tablets, digital cameras, headphones, portable game consoles, e-readers starting in 2024. Laptop computers will be forced to comply at a later date. Except for Apple, the rest of the industry has settled on USB-C, meaning this rule will force everyone to USB-C.
Wireless charging and data connections are exempt from this rule as these systems don't generate the e-waste that cables generate.
|
|
|
|
|
It's interesting that, just occasionally, the EU comes up with a really good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
I read that as, "we don't want you to throw away cables, so throw away all your cables".
|
|
|
|
|
Apple are complaining, saying it "stifles innovation". Which is rich, since they are dead against other companies innovating with Lightning connectors ... 
It's a good idea: anything which reduces the number of damn chargers and connectors I have to play with ... My phone is USB-C, but my Surface won't charge through its USB-C connector, just the MS power thingy. And the keyboard on the Surface charges through a micro USB, while my camera uses a bigger micro USB ...
And trehg cat chews on all of them indiscriminately. 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Just curious... what's the EU protocol in a couple years when someone (not just Apple) comes up with a theoretically better connector?
I'm not a big fan of government (particularly unelected bureaucrats) designing my tech.
|
|
|
|
|
Your guess is as good as mine - but it specifically excludes wireless charging, and I'd imagine that will become more prevalent anyway. Hopefully, that will get standardized as well, so Apple can't introduce a special charger pad that is essential for their phones ...
And if you think about it, governments already legislate mains electricity connectors and they haven't needed to change for a long time (the UK ones did - they went from a round pin plug to a square pin, shuttered, and fused plug in 1947 but haven't changed significantly since then). It's likely that USB-C will last a few decades at least!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently the EU is including guidelines for new connectors as technology progresses. However, the devil really is in the details on this.
|
|
|
|
|
obermd wrote: Wireless charging and data connections are exempt from this rule as these systems don't generate the e-waste that cables generate.
I never looked into this, but just how much power is wasted by wireless charging systems? Efficiency can't be 100%...
Of course I'm not suggesting getting rid of cables that aren't strictly needed isn't a good idea...
|
|
|
|
|
A quick Google reports efficiency of 50-75% when comparing wireless to wired charging. Personally I prefer wireless charging because it greatly reduces wear and tear on the connector on the phone.
Others have pointed out that some manufacturers (Apple included) have or are considering wireless charging-only models.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
One key disadvantage of wireless charging that had me abandoning it is the impossibility to use the phone while in charge, even setting/resetting alarm clocks or checking the weather forecasts will end up with a disconnection. This will mess up the battery on the long run.
Also I can't read my Kindle Unlimited for 16 hours straight this way  though I might bite the bullet and buy a dedicted reader, having ebooks on the phone means I can read anywhere anytime - waiting for my wife outside of a cosmetic shop? Waiting for the tube? Waiting for my order at a restaurant? I can cram a chapter or two there!
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Your reader should sync across devices. ???
|
|
|
|
|
Gary R. Wheeler wrote: efficiency of 50-75% when comparing wireless to wired charging
That's nothing short of terrible.
Now imagine everything going wireless. Demand is increasing all the time, capacity not so much. So basically we'd need to double capacity just to go wireless.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
