• If you are still using CentOS 7.9, it's time to convert to Alma 8 with the free centos2alma tool by Plesk or Plesk Migrator. Please let us know your experiences or concerns in this thread:
    CentOS2Alma discussion

Forwarded to devs Outgoing Mail Control / Email Addresses / Sent messages statistics design flaw

matbcvo

Basic Pleskian
Username:

TITLE

Outgoing Mail Control / Email Addresses / Sent messages statistics design flaw

PRODUCT, VERSION, OPERATING SYSTEM, ARCHITECTURE

Version 18.0.42 Update #1, CentOS Linux 7.9.2009 (Core)

PROBLEM DESCRIPTION

iJNSWzT.png


STEPS TO REPRODUCE

1. Tools & Settings
2. Outgoing Mail Control
3. Objects attempting to exceed limits -> click on email address
4. Look at right side "Sent messages" box

ACTUAL RESULT

One of "progress" bars went outside of the box

EXPECTED RESULT

All of these "progress" bars should stay inside box

ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

(DID NOT ANSWER QUESTION)

YOUR EXPECTATIONS FROM PLESK SERVICE TEAM

Confirm bug
 
Thank you for the report.
Here is the developer's reply:

The issue was not reproduced in the test environment. The outgoing mail database was adjusted manually as it is hard to reproduce the exactly same numbers of outgoing mails as on provided screenshot with the issue.

Also, it is not clear which browser was used for testing. I've verified that progress bars display correctly in Chrome, Edge and Firefox browsers:
notreproduced.JPG
To confirm the issue, more technical details are required. I would suggest clearing web browser cache and then reproducing the issue once again. If the issue still persists, the following details are necessary:
1) Specify Web Browser you're using and its exact version
2) Open the affected page with the developer's tools. In Google Chrome it is required to press F12 to open the developer's console. Check if there are any errors that appeared in the console network tab and attach error text
3) I would recommend creating a ticket to Plesk technical support and providing SSH access to the server. In this case, we'll be able to collect the necessary technical information
 
Could it be possible the with of the blue bar is miscalculated? When I manually change the with of the blue bar, it gives the same result:


Screenshot 2022-03-25 at 15.23.44.png
 
Back
Top