Thanks, I have seen that before, but in this case I don't think it is the cause (I've eliminated the possibility of 'duplicates' with a unique key too).
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Cesar Lugo <[email protected]> wrote: > Just in case it might help: If you have the collection defined using > sorteSet, and the properties you use in the compareTo of the domain entity > class happen to have duplicates in the database, the collection will only > show one of them. > > Cesar. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Cameron [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 5:14 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: record not seen in collection > > Thanks Dan, I will check these when home this evening. > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Dan Haywood <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > First, I would remove the entry in isis.properties (or in your > > AppManifest) that registers the TenantedAuthorizationFacetFactory (as > > per the README > > [1]) to check that the record that's gone missing now appears. If so, > > it confirms that it is indeed tenancy. > > > > Second, I would reinstate the facetfactory and then put a breakpoint > > in TenantedAuthorizationFacetDefault [2] and trace through the logic > > for the object that gets hidden. It implements the algorithm > > described in the README [3] > > > > > > HTH > > Dan > > > > > > > > [1] > > https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#tenancy-checking > > [2] > > > > https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security/blob/master/dom/src > > /main/java/org/isisaddons/module/security/facets/TenantedAuthorization > > FacetDefault.java#L72 [3] > > https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#application-tenancy > > > > > > On 30 November 2015 at 20:00, Stephen Cameron > > <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > I think this is going to take a bit of effort to sort out, it does > > > seem > > to > > > be related to the region, which is the one I use for returning a > > > tenancy path for each entity. So given that it was working before > > > adding tenancy, which I can can check, that will be a clue as to where > to look later. > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Stephen Cameron < > > > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Here are the relevant Native queries, they relate to a parent > > > > record > > and > > > > two children in the activity table, ids are <29>, <30>, <31> > > > > > > > > 05:46:41,713 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT > > > > > > > > > a0.createdby,a0.createdon,a0.lastmodifiedby,a0.lastmodifiedon,a0.appro > > ximateenddatetime,a0.copiedfromactivityid,a0.costforparticipant,a0.des > > cription,a0.isrestricted,a0.`name`,a0.oldid,a0.scheduleid,a0.startdate > > time,a0.activity_id,a0.classifier > > > > FROM activity a0 WHERE a0.classifier = 'EVENT' AND > > a0.parent_activity_id > > > = > > > > <29> > > > > 05:46:41,723 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT > > > > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name > > > > = b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <30> > > > > 05:46:41,726 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT > > > > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name > > > > = b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <31> > > > > 05:46:41,756 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT > > > > > > > > > b0.createdby,b0.createdon,b0.lastmodifiedby,b0.lastmodifiedon,b0.appro > > ximateenddatetime,b0.copiedfromactivityid,b0.costforparticipant,b0.des > > cription,b0.isrestricted,b0.`name`,b0.oldid,b0.scheduleid,b0.startdate > > time,b0.periodicity,b0.activity_id,b0.classifier > > > > FROM activity a0 LEFT OUTER JOIN activity b0 ON > > > > a0.parentactivity_activity_id = b0.activity_id WHERE > > > > a0.activity_id = > > > <31> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It has to find the region for 30 and 31 to do a comparison I > > > > assume, > > > which > > > > is: > > > > > > > > return ObjectContracts.compare(other, this, "name", > > > > "startDateTime", "region"); > > > > > > > > So it seems to reject id=30 as being of no interest? > > > > > > > > I tried Guava compare but i broke all my tests, maybe I'll have > > > > another > > > go > > > > > > > > region is the same for both, the startDateTime differs though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Stephen Cameron < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > >> > > > >> I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a > > > >> collection, > > both > > > >> are present in the database and get selected by the native query > > > >> that > > DN > > > >> creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed. > > > >> > > > >> This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is > > > >> not displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue > > apparently. > > > >> > > > >> Any ideas? > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > >
