Some users have a rather odd thing that is now causing issues. When you click the down arrow on stacked icons, mainly the mailfile. You get extra entries showing. Like local, then local + file path, then MailServer1 then Mailserver1/OU/Org. But there are only 2 reps. If you remove the icons and re add them the same thing happens. Compacting the workspace does not fix the issue.
This is causing some problems, any seen this or know what causes it.
Subject: Replica icons path duplicates
If you make OS copy of your local database it’s normal to see Local+filepath…
If you want to see only local and server replicas. You have to remove you other local
Subject: Replica icons path duplicates
do you get two entries? one “MailServer” & “Mailserver1/OU/Org”?
this should only happen if desktop stores two icons where one servername is wrong (MailServer cause its stored flat).
Does this happen with Mailfiles only? When do both paths reappear? when you restart, or right after opening replica on server?
I’ve seen this once, when replica on server was not available and entry was wrong in homeservers catalog (where notes sometimes looks it up when doing a failover).
Markus Seitz
Subject: RE: Replica icons path duplicates
It is on mailfiles, the main problem I have seen is with the path showing in the second item on local. First line local, next says local mail\mname.nsf Line 3 Mailserver01, line 4 Mailserver01/OU/Org. But there are actually only 2 replicas one local one on the server. It’s just that just the pull down arrow is showing two for each. The problem is if the wrong one is selected it causes problems with one of out apps, and there are mailing issues with it.
Thanks for you posts BTW & TIA
Regards
Matt
Subject: RE: Replica icons path duplicates
i guess desktop.dsk physically contains three entries in this case. (you could check that with our tool - free eval - BCC ClientGenie ( | BCC).
one thing i could think of: have a look in your current location document to see how users homeserver is entered. maybe it’s entered flat?
since that problem seems to be reproducible maybe you should open a support incident?
Markus Seitz