PlaceTable updates in new RM minor releases
Quote from Richard Otter on 2026-08-11, 4:07 pmIn many minor updates of RM, the release notes will indicate that new LDS temple names/places have been added.
Looking at the PlaceTable, all of the LDS names are at the start, but my custom names continue immediately afterward.My RM v11.5.0 database contains 171 LDS places and my first places starts as PlaceID 173.
Are the updates renumbering the placeID in the table to fit the new LDS names at the start?
If no one already knows, curiosity will force me to load old backups and check this out.
By the way, my ConfigTable DataRec column, RecID=1, starts with
<Version>11000</Version><STVersion>700</STVersion>
Richard Otter
In many minor updates of RM, the release notes will indicate that new LDS temple names/places have been added.
Looking at the PlaceTable, all of the LDS names are at the start, but my custom names continue immediately afterward.
My RM v11.5.0 database contains 171 LDS places and my first places starts as PlaceID 173.
Are the updates renumbering the placeID in the table to fit the new LDS names at the start?
If no one already knows, curiosity will force me to load old backups and check this out.
By the way, my ConfigTable DataRec column, RecID=1, starts with
<Version>11000</Version><STVersion>700</STVersion>
Richard Otter
Quote from Richard Otter on 2026-08-11, 4:24 pmNEVERMIND-
I just filtered by PlaceType=1 and see that the new ones are placed at the end, as expected.
Sorry for the noise in the forum.Richard
NEVERMIND-
I just filtered by PlaceType=1 and see that the new ones are placed at the end, as expected.
Sorry for the noise in the forum.
Richard
Quote from Tom Holden on 2026-08-11, 4:38 pmI wouldn't call that noise, Richard. Rather, your second post is reassuring because I opened up an old database that has migrated through a few versions and saw that I recognised a place that surely wouldn't have a temple at around record 170. And none of the temples were PlaceType=1, all 0. But that was a play database and maybe I did something stupid a long time ago with sqlite.
Also created an empty database and see there are now 235 temples. The church seems to be growing if the number of temples has grown by 38% in a decade or so.
I wouldn't call that noise, Richard. Rather, your second post is reassuring because I opened up an old database that has migrated through a few versions and saw that I recognised a place that surely wouldn't have a temple at around record 170. And none of the temples were PlaceType=1, all 0. But that was a play database and maybe I did something stupid a long time ago with sqlite.
Also created an empty database and see there are now 235 temples. The church seems to be growing if the number of temples has grown by 38% in a decade or so.
Quote from Tom Holden on 2026-08-11, 4:53 pmAnd the first appearance of <STVersion> is in RM 7.0:
<Version>6000</Version><STVersion>700</STVersion>
I don't know what it means.
Oddly, the Version number remained the same as it was for RM6.
And the first appearance of <STVersion> is in RM 7.0:
<Version>6000</Version><STVersion>700</STVersion>
I don't know what it means.
Oddly, the Version number remained the same as it was for RM6.
Quote from thejerrybryan on 2026-08-12, 11:47 amI'm sort of repeating what's already been said. They go to the "back", except it's the back of what's already there. So if you make a new and empty database, they all go to the front because the front at that point is back of what's already there. That's why most any database will have a bunch of temples at the front of the place list. And some databases might have all the temples at the front of the database. And repeating myself, that's because for a new and empty database, the front is the back of everything that's already there.
I'm sort of repeating what's already been said. They go to the "back", except it's the back of what's already there. So if you make a new and empty database, they all go to the front because the front at that point is back of what's already there. That's why most any database will have a bunch of temples at the front of the place list. And some databases might have all the temples at the front of the database. And repeating myself, that's because for a new and empty database, the front is the back of everything that's already there.