Jump to content


Photo

No matches even though I have matching persons in the tree


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 07:14 AM

I'm using the latest version of RM (6.1.0.3) together with Gramps, and I see a weird problem:

When I export a GEDCOM from Gramps, and import it into RM, I get no matches with the tree, even though I have most of my ancestors there. When I download the tree from FS, I see that all ancestors are there, with the exact same names as I have them in RM, and RM can merge most of those automatically.

With the previous version, I got loads of matches against nFS, and I know that the tree has less persons in it, but I would expect the matching process to work against the persons that I uploaded myself earlier. Is there a problem with search?

#2 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 3675 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:46 AM

If you import your RM database into Gramps and then export a GEDCOM all the FT IDs are stripped. That is because Gramps doesn't support them. You would need to use File>FamilySearch Central>AutoMatch in RM to have all the IDs added in again.

If your download from FT into your RM database then all the IDs are being included automatically. That is why they are showing as matched.
Renee
RootsMagic

#3 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 07:48 AM

I know that, and I'm trying to work out a way to get FT ID's to Gramps once a person has been matched.

But the real problem I see now is, that when I have a person without such an ID (which means unmatched to RM, I know), I expect search to find that person (or close matches) in the tree, just like it did with nFS in the previous version.

But todays reality is that search never returns anything, even if a person in the tree has the exact same data as I have in RM, i.e. even if I uploaded that person earlier myself.

#4 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 3675 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 09:02 AM

You will have to speak with Gramps about supporting FT IDs. There would be no other way to have them import into their program.

NFS had a lot more data on individuals that could be compared for potential matches. When information was moved to the FT only the summary view items in NFS came over. That limits the amount of information that could be compared as a match. When you are on the Find Matches tab in the FamilySearch Person Tools click on "Search for more matches" to broaden your search criteria.
Renee
RootsMagic

#5 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 06:22 AM

OK, I'm going to repeat my self here, to make things clear. I have persons in the FS tree that I have uploaded myself, via RM. That means that, no matter if I have a valid FT ID in RM or not, I expect them to show up on a search, because they should be exact matches. I mean, it's comparing my own data in the tree to my own data in RM.

I'm checking search for my grandfather right now, and even when I use "search for more matches" clearing everything except his first and last name, I get no results. And even a search with surname only provides NO results in RM.

#6 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 06:38 AM

When I perform the same search on-line, in the tree, I do get the results that I expect, so it looks like some communication problem between RM and FS.

My log-on credentials are OK, since I can add new persons to the tree from RM.

Is there a way to get some sort of communications log?

#7 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 02:13 PM

Further info:

The only search that DOES work from RM is search on ID, which is useless, because when I have the ID, I don't need to search ...

#8 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 3675 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 10:49 AM

When you added the person to the FT via RM they would be automatically matched in RM to that FT person. They would have a FS ID in the program. If they are already matched then the search results will not bring them up again to match or merge them. The only thing I can think of why you're trying to get them in the search results is if you UnMatched the person after uploading them to FT.

Open a support ticket and include a File>Backup (.rmgb) of your database, and the name of the individual to test.

http://support.roots...us_requests/new
Renee
RootsMagic

#9 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 11:52 AM

You're close. The reason I need to re-match is that I have this gedcom from Gramps, which does not have FT ID's, because I can't rely on moving data back and forth between Gramps and RM yet. That's a fact that I have to live with, since gedcom implementations and data models are different. So that's more or less OK, in a way.

The problem I have with RM 6.1.0.3 is that no matches are found, ever, even when they are there, for instance because they were already entered by my cousin who goes with username DoddemaGen here. And that's a problem that affects every new person that I have in RM, no matter whether he/she comes from a gedcom file created by Gramps, or by a cousin who doesn't use the FT, or whether I entered this person myself, after researching a local archive/site.

In all these cases, I expect that RM finds existing persons in the tree if they are there, so that I won't duplicates. That doesn't work, and it has never worked for me in the tree version of RM. It did work for the nFS version.

To illustrate this:

When I log-on to the tree with chrome, and search for Hindrik Doddema, I see 16 results, most of which were entered by DoddemaGen.

When I start the same search in RM, I see nothing.

#10 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3252 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 12:44 PM

I added Hindrik Doddema with no events to a trial RM database. "Find matches" returned the message "Not enough information to do a match. Click "Search button to find more". On clicking the search button, it then returned 15 possible matches.
Tom user of RM6306 FTM2014 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
Posted Imagewiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> Posted Image app, a growing bundle of RootsMagic utilities.

#11 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 03:08 PM

OK, that's nice! Which RM version? Your signature suggests 6.0.0.5, and I'm using 6.1.0.3.

Search worked for me in all nFS versions, i.e. in 6.0, but it has never worked in the FT version, beta and 6.1.0.3.

I'm asking, because to me it looks like the nFS versions are OK, and the FT version is faulty, search wise, but if anyone can prove that search actually works in 6.1, I may have to look for some sort of network error. That's a bit harder to do, but I can and will do it when nothing else helps.

#12 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3252 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 05:29 PM

I'm using 6103. And looking at Family Search Central in RM for the first time. Do my results prove to you that it works? Does it work for you for other people?
Tom user of RM6306 FTM2014 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
Posted Imagewiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> Posted Image app, a growing bundle of RootsMagic utilities.

#13 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 07:50 AM

Yes, thanks. Your results prove that RM 6103 can do the search I need, but it still doesn't work here. On-line, I see 16 possible matches for Hindrik Doddema today, so the tree is growing, but inside Family Search Central I see zero. Even a common name like Joseph Smith yields no results inside RM, and over 500 on-line.

Today I tried to eavesdrop on the network traffic, using Wireshark, but that doesn't help, because the traffic is encrypted. I can see that RM contacts FS, but that's all.

Your experiment proves that RM 6103 can do the search, but somehow it still doesn't return anything here, which means that I need to analyze what's different between your and my setup, which can be:
1. Different Windows configs, mine is Dutch, XP and 8, both fail,
2. Different networks. I'm in The Netherlands, but I can access FS and RM sites, and search on-line,
3. Different FS accounts. I'll try to sign up for another one, using another username and email address.

#14 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 08:12 AM

Update:
A new FS account doesn't help. I need to get an insight in the network traffic between RM and FS. Maybe RM is not authorized for FT access outside the U.S. or so. No idea.

#15 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3252 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 08:19 AM

Is it possible that you have missed a step? In my case, initially, RMFS finds no matches but clicking on the highlighted button "Search for more matches" does return 15, not the 16 we count on the web. BTW, my RM runs on Win 7-64bit Home Premium.
Posted Image

Edited by TomH, 23 April 2013 - 08:26 AM.

Tom user of RM6306 FTM2014 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
Posted Imagewiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> Posted Image app, a growing bundle of RootsMagic utilities.

#16 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 3675 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 08:36 AM

We would really like to get a copy of your database. Tell us who to look at and what ID it should be returning. I am kind of curious to see if there is an issue with search on people with special characters, unicoding or umlauts in their names or places.

Open a support ticket and include a File>Backup (.rmgb) of your database.
http://support.roots...com/tickets/new
Renee
RootsMagic

#17 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 09:40 AM

@Renee, I did create a support ticket and I will add a backup of my database in a minute. The problem occurs with any person, like Hindrik Doddema, or even Joseph Smith, both names without special characters.

@TomH, yes, I perform every step you describe, i.e. match, then search for more, and I see that RM goes on-line to search and waits a few seconds, but no matter what, the result is always zero. I'm on Dutch Windows 8 Home 64-bit, no word about premium. Same problem on Dutch Windows XP in virtual box.

I created a support ticket on the FS site too, hoping that maybe they can check some logs, or tell me whether RM is authorized to search the tree from outside the U.S.

#18 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 10:11 AM

Renee, your comment about special characters inspired me to try a US Windows version today, and that works. It's strange, because with 6005, I had no problems at all with my Dutch Windows 8. They started with the first beta that was available for the tree, and continued with the 6103 release.

This US Windows XP Pro is not properly licensed to me, so I'm still thinking about how to tweak my licensed Windows 8 so that RM 6103 runs in a US like environment. Also, I still don't understand why Windows language makes a difference for RM 6103, where it had no ill effect on RM 6005.

The results I get are perfectly repeatable. All Windows copies that I use run on the same hardware, same network, same ISP, etc.

#19 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 3675 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 11:34 AM

Version 6.0.0.5 was still working with the NFS website. It was only after 6.1 that RM synced with FamilySearch FT. FamilySearch.org is available in various languages now as is the Family Tree. I imagine when you are searching on the FT website that it is detecting your Dutch version of Windows. So there is no conflicts there.

I tested your database and I had no problems getting search results with RM FT sync. That's because I have a US version of Windows. I will pass it along to development to see if there is anything we can do on our end, or if it's a FT API issue that needs to be addressed by FamilySearch.
Renee
RootsMagic

#20 ennoborg

ennoborg

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:18 AM

Thanks. I'm looking forward to the results, and I hope that you will post them on the forum, so that other international RM FT users can also read and react.