'Assigned To' showing as blank

[simonwarren]

Help needed please.

I'm using SugarCRM version 6.0.2

I've created a new batch of users/employees. I am getting the following problems/symptoms

1. I I assign a lead to one of these users and then save the 'Assigned To' shows as blank.
2. If then that user searches for 'My items' the user does appear in the list.
3. In advanced search for leads the above users do not appear in the 'assigned to' search box thus preventing other users from searching for leads assigned to those users.

Can anyone help? Thanks

[csinclair]

I am experiencing similar in SugarCRM Professional Version 6.2.3 (Build 6658).

I originally had the same issue as you with the Assigned To field of a particular Opportunity shown as blank. Checking the HTML source I could see the user's ID was the correct assignee, but for some reason it wasn't displaying on the screen. I originally experienced this on version 6.2.1, where this user was created. I noticed that after I performed some steps preparing to upgrade to 6.2.3, the Assigned To field mysteriously had content. I performed (under Administration > Repair) Rebuild Relationships + Quick Repair and Rebuild. There may have been other steps - I think I also disabled Sugar's / Smarty's caching in the day leading up to the upgrade.

I would suggest also upgrading to the latest version, if possible.

Regarding your 3rd point: Under Opportunities, I have the same new user who has opportunities assigned to them however they do not appear under the Assigned To list. I have attached an image showing (parts of names have been blanked) taken from the Opportunities tab.

I would also like some assistance regarding this issue...

Cheers.

[mpoer@profilingsolutions.com]

csinclair, I wonder if your new user is deleted or if he/she does not have an "Active" status? Or perhaps if you may need to do another repair/rebuild.

Is it only the Opportunities module that seems to have this issue?

[csinclair]

Matthew, many thanks for your reply.

I have confirmed the user is present and currently Active. There are 8 active users in total but only 6 appearing in the Assigned To list.

I have performed multiple Quick Repair and Rebuild operations, as well as individual rebuilds such as Rebuild Relationships. Nothing has helped so far.

All sections visible (Accounts, Contacts, Opportunities, Reports, Documents, Leads) have the same 6 users under the Assigned To list.

I have attached the list of users marked as Active. The users not showing are usernames prefixed with "db" and "dlj".

Looking at the users table, nothing appears out of place for the two users that aren't listed.

[mpoer@profilingsolutions.com]

Looks like Sugar Pro - could there be any Roles/Team assignments that keep these users from being relevant to these modules?

[csinclair]

Thanks for the reply. You are correct - this is Sugar Pro. I didn't know I was able to access its support directly. I will look at submitting a case, linking back to this thread.

There's nothing that I can see that I would imagine contributing to the issue. I have checked both Roles and Teams and both appear to look fine. The teams however for the affected user/s had a relationship where they were reporting to another user that was inactive, however I tried activating that user and did not make a difference - neither new users or previously deactivated users appear in the list.

The missing users have the same name (I have since appended '2' to one of them). Another administrator here renamed an existing user instead of creating a new one and deactivating the former.

I have performed most individual Repair and Rebuild operations, as well as the Quick Repair/Rebuild operation, without success.

It would be nice to know how the Assigned To list is populated. I have since enabled debug logging, however I cannot see any specific SQL queries executed that would be likely to populate the list.

I just created a username named test, however haven't assigned any Opportunities or anything else to that username, and it doesn't appear in the Assigned To list either. I'm afraid of manipulating existing users in the list (e.g. mark an Active user Inactive and refreshing) due to the possibility of not getting them back.

Cheers.

[mpoer@profilingsolutions.com]

that's all pretty weird. The vardefs for all assigned-to fields are housed at include\SugarObjects\implements\assignable\vardefs .php. It's a normal one:many relationship between the users table and the current module's table. There not really anything special about it, it just prints a list of users and uses the user_name field as the assigned_user_name (text value).

I'm wondering if your browser has cached the values or something. Have you tried clearing browser cache and/or using a different browser? I do know that the default height for the multi-select box is 6 (meaning six list-entries) which your screen shot was showing but it's supposed to scroll past that - but obviously your scroll-bar is grayed-out. But for the selector box to not have adjusted at all after adding a new user - weird.

I guess another possibility could be your licensing. If you're only licensed for six users there may be some restriction I"m not seeing in the vardef. But my understanding was that everything will work with x number of users, you'll just get admin notifications to order more (never tried it, though).

Not sure I'll have many other ideas on this - get at sugarcrm.com/support and see if they can find some clue. Please post back if you find a resolution!

[csinclair]

Thanks again for your suggestions, Matthew.

I have submitted a case with support and am currently awaiting further correspondence. They initially asked similar questions (cache/browser, are other users affected). What I've informed support: I have cleared my browser cache, tried different browsers, tried different users and got users on different computers to try. All see the exact same list.

I also got the person whose name doesn't appear in the list, and they also see the same.

We are licensed for 10 users. I have also confirmed that other newly created test users, as well as recently reactivated users, do not appear in the list. I do not want to temporarily deactivate currently active users in the event they cannot be reactivated.

The users that are in the list were created/renamed/reactivated prior to upgrading from 5.2.0 to 6.2.1.

The following upgrade path was used:

5.2.0 to 5.5.1
5.5.1 to 6.0.4
6.0.4 to 6.1.6
6.1.6 to 6.2.1

The system had not been used by end users during the upgrade process, and there were no show-stopping errors encountered. We upgraded from 6.2.1 to 6.2.3 in attempt to resolve this issue to no avail.

To be honest I'm not very familiar with vardefs but have looked at the file you mentioned and couldn't tell you if it had a problem or not.

I'll definitely post back if a resolution is found.

[mpoer@profilingsolutions.com]

That upgrade path looks solid to me. I look forward to hearing what the underlying issue is.

Thanks.

[csinclair]

RESOLUTION BELOW...

It appears caches are being accessed despite enabling Developer Mode under Administration and disabling caching in both config.php and config_override.php ($sugar_config['external_cache_disabled'] => true; is effectively set in both).

I saw this in the log with DEBUG enabled:

Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Found cache backend SugarCachesMash
Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Found cache backend SugarCacheZend
Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Found cache backend SugarCacheWincache
Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Found cache backend SugarCacheRedis
Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Found cache backend SugarCacheMemory
Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Using cache backend SugarCacheMemory, since 999 is less than 1000
Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Found cache backend SugarCacheMemcached
Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Found cache backend SugarCacheMemcache
Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Using cache backend SugarCacheMemcache, since 900 is less than 999
Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Found cache backend SugarCacheFile
Thu Oct  6 13:50:55 2011 [6540][-none-][DEBUG] Found cache backend SugarCacheAPC

For some reason it is still using SugarCacheMemory and SugarCacheMemcache.

In Sugar's include/SugarCache/ folder, I modified the following three files to override any ability to cache by appending a '9' to its priority value.

SugarCacheAbstract.php
SugarCacheMemory.php
SugarCacheMemcache.php

I'm sure there is a more sane way to achieve this however this is what worked for me to confirm the specific cause.

After more trial and error, I found the issue to occur specifically with SugarCacheMemcache.php when using its default priority. Its (incorrect) content is being displayed.

SUCCESS: Restarting the Memcache daemon appears to have fixed the problem.

I previously set up Memcache on the same machine for caching other web applications and I wasn't aware it was being used by Sugar until now. I'm not sure why it wasn't flushing this cached data as it should have expired ages ago; it could have been a Sugar or Memcache issue.

In addition, after looking at SugarCacheMemcache.php, it appears to NOT look at external_cache_disabled but only external_cache_disabled_memcache (not even Developer Mode prevents stops it from running?).

    public function useBackend()
    {
        if ( extension_loaded('memcache')
                && empty($GLOBALS['sugar_config']['external_cache_disabled_memcache'])
                && $this->_getMemcacheObject() )
            return true;

        return false;
    }

I was under this impression due to it being mentioned on various sites:

http://www.sugarcrm.com/forums/f148/...sed-crm-68434/
http://www.sugarcrm.com/forums/f6/de...e-5-0-a-31368/
How to avoid SugarCRM External Cache Warnings?.|.João Morais
http://www.sugarcrm.com/forums/f115/...nt-save-37439/
thcGroup Log System » How to disable the cache usage in SugarCRM

It's interesting as to why it was functioning properly under 5.2.0 yet not after upgrading to 6.2.x.

If I run into any more oddities I will disable Sugar's Memcache support by setting $sugar_config['external_cache_disabled_memcache'] to true.

Many thanks for your help!

EDIT: Just noticed that Memcache is still storing older values and doesn't clear them until its daemon is restarted.

I have spotted an inconsistency in the SugarCache*.php files - SugarCacheMemcache.php (and all other files except SugarCacheAbstract.php).

In function _setExternal, there is a reference to $this->expireTimeout however this variable is never defined (in extended class SugarCacheAbstract, it is named $_expireTimeout which should be referenced to as $this->_expireTimeout) therefore defaulting to a value of 0 which means cache indefinitely.

I can see this "bug" is introduced in file SugarPro-Upgrade-6.1.x-to-6.2.1.zip. I have downloaded and checked SugarPro-Full-6.2.3.zip and SugarPro-6.3.0RC2.zip and it's still present.

I have raised a bug regarding the above. I hope it's not a duplicate...