CiviCRM Community Forums (archive)

Using version 4.4.4 I'm finding that the count of Activities as displayed on a contact's summary screen does not marry up with what I can see. I've got the CiviMail activity switch such that I have a separate tab in the summary for mailings. I understand that there is still a bug in 4.4.4 whereby even with this optional separate listing of bulk mailings, the Activities tab still counts the mailings even though they don't show in that tab. Even so, my counts are still incorrect.

On a randomly chosen contact, their summary screen reports 14 Activities, but lists only 2. The Mailings tab lists 5 mailings and displays 5 mailings. As I see it the count shown in the Activities tab should be either 2, or 7. On checking the database table civicrm_activity_count for this contact id, it shows 14 rows, implying 14 activities in total.

If I run a search for Activities using the same contact's email address I get 11 results, 9 of which are Bulk mailings.

Any input welcome.

Hi Hershel
I've done a little more digging, but not yet resolved it. The activities that are missing for my user look to be old bulk mailings. The mailings still exists within CiviCRM, but when I view the mailing report, the figure for "Intended Recipients" is stated as zero. Clicking on Intended Recipients does however present the full list of contacts for whom the mailing was made, including the contact I've been looking at. My assumption is that some bits of data have got lost/corrupted during an upgrade at some point (this site was first built 5 years ago so the CiviCRM database has gone through a fair few upgrades. I did do a schema integrity check a while back. Perhaps its time to do that again and see if it helps.

Interesting. Not just me then. Anyone else seeing similar issues?

Hi Joanne

I saw that thread when I first spotted this issue, which indeed led me to turn on the Mailings tab in order to see if that improved my situation, thinking that perhaps my listing of activities was not actually completing due to long processing times, hence giving an impression of a wrong count.

Indeed, I agree that it is a positive step. Strangely it seems to be not well documented. I'm looking after a good number of Civi sites, and this is the first time I've come across it.