Hi Vanya, yes agree, now we typically embed the upgrade statements within DHIS 2 itself, as we have learnt that people often forget to run upgrade statements which causes all kinds of problems.
regards, Lars On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Vanya Seth <van...@thoughtworks.com> wrote: > Hi Lars > > Thanks for the response. > > But have we only introduced not null constraints over different version > updates? > > But am still not sure how the constraints get applied if the data does not > abide by the rules. > > What looks like a reasonable process to me is : > - Update your database data to abide by the new constraints. > - Deploy the new war. > > Thought? > > Regards > Vanya > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Lars Helge Øverland <l...@dhis2.org> > wrote: > >> Hi Vanya, >> >> sure. We definitely try to avoid this. See previous email in thread. The >> operand constraint has been removed. We will include not-null constraints >> in the upgrade notes. >> >> For 2.25 <https://www.dhis2.org/225-upgrade> we will set the "created" >> and "lastupdated" columns of tables of "identifiable objects" to not-null. >> >> best regards, >> >> Lars >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Vanya Seth <van...@thoughtworks.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Morten and Lars >>> >>> There are certain key points highlighted in the above email. Whenever a >>> new DHIS2 version comes out there are new integrity constraints added but >>> thats not part of the release or the upgrade notes. So, whats the right >>> way to get information about these constraints? >>> >>> When we deploy the new war we assume that the TableAlteror will take >>> care of modifying the schema and also take care of adding the new >>> constraints. But in case the existing data does not abide by these >>> constraints how do we apply them? >>> >>> So, principally after a successful redeploy of the war of a higher >>> version can we say that the DHIS instance has been upgraded in its true >>> sense. >>> As of now it seems the war does get updated but the underlying database >>> does not. >>> >>> Needless to say this breaks the export /import of metadata downstream. >>> >>> Any insights about this would be appreciated. >>> >>> Regards >>> Vanya >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Aamer Mohammed <aam...@thoughtworks.com >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> For continuation of testing, we changed the metadata to ensure that a >>>> Group can be part of only one GroupSet. >>>> 1) We got the below issue. >>>> {"status":"ERROR","stats":{"total":1,"created":0,"updated":0 >>>> ,"deleted":0,"ignored":1},"typeReports":[{"klass":"org.hisp. >>>> dhis.indicator.Indicator","stats":{"total":1,"created":0,"up >>>> dated":0,"deleted":0,"ignored":1},"objectReports":[{"klass": >>>> "org.hisp.dhis.indicator.Indicator","index":277,"uid":"oMbEl >>>> S3lhOO","errorReports":[{"message":"Missing required property >>>> `numerator`.","mainKlass":"org.hisp.dhis.indicator.Indicator >>>> ","errorKlass":"java.lang.String","errorCode":"E4000"}]}]}]} >>>> >>>> which means that Numerator is required field for an indicator. This was >>>> not the case in 2.21. This restriction was introduced in some version after >>>> 2.21. However, we modified the metadata for the indicator having this issue >>>> and proceeded further. >>>> >>>> 2) Now we got the below issue. >>>> {"httpStatus":"Internal Server Error","httpStatusCode":500,"s >>>> tatus":"ERROR","message":"ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique >>>> constraint \"dataelement_operand_unique_key\"\n Detail: Key >>>> (dataelementid, categoryoptioncomboid)=(4497, 3576) already exists."} >>>> >>>> This means that you cannot have duplicate combination of >>>> (dataelementid, categoryoptioncomboid) in dataelementoperand table. This >>>> constraint was not present in 2.21 version. >>>> When we see dataelementoperand table, there are lot of such duplicates. >>>> We would like to understand more around this constraint and why it was >>>> introduced. >>>> *Is there any note which has the details about the constraints being >>>> introduced in a DHIS version?* >>>> >>>> 3) Also this constraint (dataelement_operand_unique_key) is not >>>> present in the instance which was upgraded from 2.21 to 2.24. But it is >>>> present in the instance which is directly on 2.24. Any thoughts on this. >>>> Did the constraint not get created in upgraded instance because the data >>>> was not abiding to the constraint rules? What happens in a dhis upgrade if >>>> there is any constraint being introduced and existing data does not confirm >>>> to the constraint? Please suggest. >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> Aamer. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Lars Helge Øverland <l...@dhis2.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Aamer, >>>>> >>>>> the problem here happens because the hibernate mapping between >>>>> GroupSet and Group is one-to-many, ie. a Group can only be part of one >>>>> GroupSet. >>>>> >>>>> There is a reason for this, but it is not very good ;) When we store >>>>> favorites with group sets, we need to know which dimension (GroupSet) a >>>>> dimension item (Group) is part of. If the Group is part of many GroupSets, >>>>> we need another link object in between to represent which dimension it is >>>>> part of. This can clearly be done and this is something we plan to fix, >>>>> but >>>>> it is a bit of work and it requires an upgrade routine to upgrade existing >>>>> databases. >>>>> >>>>> So I am pretty sure that is why you see these duplicates: You have >>>>> groups which are part of multiple group sets. In these cases, Hibernate >>>>> will create duplicate GroupSets as a result of the database integrity >>>>> issue. >>>>> >>>>> So short term solution is to change the metadata, long term we will >>>>> fix this properly and allow for many-to-many between Group and GroupSet. >>>>> >>>>> regards, >>>>> >>>>> Lars >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Morten Olav Hansen <mor...@dhis2.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Aamer >>>>>> >>>>>> Lars knows what is wrong, he will provide a fix shortly :) >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen >>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2 >>>>>> University of Oslo >>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Aamer Mohammed < >>>>>> aam...@thoughtworks.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks Morten. Let us know if any other details are required from >>>>>>> our end in this regard. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>> Aamer. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Morten Olav Hansen < >>>>>>> mor...@dhis2.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That's interesting. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> @Lars any suggestions why this happens? I guess there is something >>>>>>>> wrong with our mapping. Will have a look tomorrow. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen >>>>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2 >>>>>>>> University of Oslo >>>>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Victor Garcia < >>>>>>>> vgarcia...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Morten, Sultan, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think we know the reason of duplicates: categoryOptionGroups are >>>>>>>>> shared between categoryOptionGroupSets, for example, ">= 15" is >>>>>>>>> used in three categoryOptionGroupSets (Paediatrics, HIV and general). >>>>>>>>> In >>>>>>>>> the API, categoryOptionGroups appear duplicated as many times as they >>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>> re-used. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We don't know if sharing categoryOptionGroups is something to >>>>>>>>> avoid, but it seems to be the cause of this issue. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Víctor >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 12 September 2016 at 09:41, Morten Olav Hansen < >>>>>>>>> mor...@dhis2.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi again >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Would it be possible to share your database with me? I haven't >>>>>>>>>> seen this >>>>>>>>>> issues anywhere else. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen >>>>>>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2 >>>>>>>>>> University of Oslo >>>>>>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Sultanahamar Mohammad < >>>>>>>>>> sult...@thoughtworks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> > Hi Morten, >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > This is what our table is showing up when we say \d >>>>>>>>>> dataelement. I think >>>>>>>>>> > there is nothing suspicious out here. >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Regards, >>>>>>>>>> > Sultan Ahamar. >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Morten Olav Hansen < >>>>>>>>>> mor...@dhis2.org> >>>>>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >> I'm not sure what is causing it, but it shouldn't be allowed >>>>>>>>>> to begin >>>>>>>>>> >> with. Is there any constraint on the UID column in your >>>>>>>>>> database? >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> [image: Inline image 1] >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>>>>> >> Morten Olav Hansen >>>>>>>>>> >> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2 >>>>>>>>>> >> University of Oslo >>>>>>>>>> >> http://www.dhis2.org >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Sultanahamar Mohammad < >>>>>>>>>> >> sult...@thoughtworks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> Hi Morten, >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> Hope you are doing good. Let us know your thoughts on the >>>>>>>>>> above issue >>>>>>>>>> >>> and please let us know if you need any information that you >>>>>>>>>> might require. >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>> >>> Sultan Ahamar. >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Sultanahamar Mohammad < >>>>>>>>>> >>> sult...@thoughtworks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Hi Morten, >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> We have pulled latest code from 2.24 and tried import / >>>>>>>>>> export again. >>>>>>>>>> >>>> We have some interesting observations >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> *DB snapshot:* >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> There are no duplicate items in DB. We double checked. >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> *Entity endpoint snapshot:* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Interestingly we found few duplicate entities when we try >>>>>>>>>> to fetch >>>>>>>>>> >>>> this data through the API. In Maintenance app, we are not >>>>>>>>>> able to see these >>>>>>>>>> >>>> duplicate entities. Does it also explain why we get >>>>>>>>>> repeating entries (with >>>>>>>>>> >>>> same UID's) in the full export JSON as well? Let us know on >>>>>>>>>> how to proceed >>>>>>>>>> >>>> and if you need more input. >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Thanks for all the help in advance. >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Sultan Ahamar. >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Morten Olav Hansen < >>>>>>>>>> mor...@dhis2.org> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Hi Vanya >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> This should now have been fixed in master and 224. It will >>>>>>>>>> now do a >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> global UID check first, and report back any duplicates, if >>>>>>>>>> it finds a >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> duplicate it will remove them from the import and report >>>>>>>>>> back an >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> `ErrorReport` (as it would do with other validation >>>>>>>>>> issues). So if it finds >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> a duplicate, you will need to set atomic mode to NONE to >>>>>>>>>> have it import and >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> ignore the duplicates. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> (btw, there was several duplicates in your file, not sure >>>>>>>>>> how that >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> happened.. maybe something needs to be cleaned in your >>>>>>>>>> source instance) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Morten Olav Hansen >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> University of Oslo >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> http://www.dhis2.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Morten Olav Hansen < >>>>>>>>>> mor...@dhis2.org> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Vanya >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> This should have been caught by the importer... but there >>>>>>>>>> are several >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> duplicates without the file you sent me, MaO4Ik8f34O is >>>>>>>>>> used in 3 category >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> option groups, same with oqeVQ71LCgY.. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> I will look into making the validation process more >>>>>>>>>> robust.. but at >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> least you should know that this file have issues >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> University of Oslo >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Morten Olav Hansen < >>>>>>>>>> mor...@dhis2.org> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ok, thanks Vanya, I'm looking into it now >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> University of Oslo >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Vanya Seth < >>>>>>>>>> van...@thoughtworks.com> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Morten >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for the response. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We ran into another issue while trying to do a full >>>>>>>>>> export and >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> import. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As per the previous conversations we took care of all >>>>>>>>>> data >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> migrations (as per the new constraints on the DB- pretty >>>>>>>>>> much caught by the >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Importer during the validation phase itself). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Having done that we run into this issue: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The 'categoryoptiongroup' import is failing with >>>>>>>>>> constraint >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> violation for the UID. We checked the data and there is >>>>>>>>>> no repeating UID in >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the database. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The error text is attached for your reference, as well >>>>>>>>>> the payload >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> used for the import. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for all the help in advance. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Vanya >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Morten Olav Hansen < >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> mor...@dhis2.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks Aamer, I'm looking at a similar bug right now.. >>>>>>>>>> seems some >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> objects don't get their deps properly attached.. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> University of Oslo >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Aamer Mohammed < >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> aam...@thoughtworks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Morten, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please find the payload for below request >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *curl -H "Content-Type: application/json" -X GET -u >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> username:password >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "http://localhost:8888/api/24/ >>>>>>>>>> metadata?filter=created:gt:2016-07 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <http://localhost:8888/api/24/ >>>>>>>>>> metadata?filter=created:gt:2016-07>" > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> metadata.224.newapi.created.json* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Import the payload in a fresh instance for import using >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *curl -H "Content-Type: application/json" -X POST >>>>>>>>>> --data >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> @metadata.224.newapi.created.json -u admin:district >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> “http://localhost:8080/api/24/metadata?atomicMode=NONE >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <http://localhost:8080/api/24/metadata?atomicMode=NONE>” >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> output_created_besteffort.txt* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If the same payload is run with atomicMode=ALL, I am >>>>>>>>>> getting >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 'Invalid references' errors which is acceptable. But >>>>>>>>>> if it is run with >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> atomicMode=NONE, it is throwing the error for which >>>>>>>>>> the complete stack >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> trace is attached earlier. filename: ' >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *output_created_besteffort_trace.txt'* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Let me know if the complete payload or any other >>>>>>>>>> details are >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> required from my end. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Aamer. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Morten Olav Hansen < >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> mor...@dhis2.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Aamer >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Could you please share the payload of the object >>>>>>>>>> where this >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> happen? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> University of Oslo >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:13 PM, Aamer Mohammed < >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> aam...@thoughtworks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Morten, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The Importer was run with atomicMode=ALL. Though the >>>>>>>>>> payload is >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> huge, only few errors were shown in ImportSummary. >>>>>>>>>> As per errors in >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> previous ImportSummary, I have done below. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) ensured the 'short name' field is unique for each >>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 'data elements' and 'data element group' as well >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) UID of admin, Super User, tracked entity was >>>>>>>>>> changed in >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> payload to be same to where it is getting imported. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have manually resolved them and ran the importer >>>>>>>>>> again with >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> atomicMode=ALL. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I got exception as attached in trace file >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 'output_besteffort_trace.txt' >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Would these kind of issues be known only after the >>>>>>>>>> import has >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> failed? and we need to resolve them one-by-one and >>>>>>>>>> as-and-when the importer >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> throws them? Is there any note which has the details >>>>>>>>>> about the constraints >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> being introduced in a new DHIS version? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, If we export a filtered set of >>>>>>>>>> metadata using ' >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> /api/24/metadata?filter=lastUpdated:gt:2016-05' and >>>>>>>>>> run the >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> importer with atomicMode=NONE >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *curl -H "Content-Type: application/json" -X POST >>>>>>>>>> --data >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> @metadata.224.newapi.json -u admin:district >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> “http://localhost:8080/api/24/ >>>>>>>>>> metadata?atomicMode=NONE >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <http://localhost:8080/api/24/ >>>>>>>>>> metadata?atomicMode=NONE>” > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> output_created_besteffort_trace.txt* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Getting below exception in trace. Complete trace >>>>>>>>>> also attached. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> * INFO 2016-08-26 15:58:38,217 (admin) Creating 57 >>>>>>>>>> object(s) of >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> type ReportTable (DefaultObjectBundleService.java >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [qtp289378424-12]) org.hibernate.TransientObjectE >>>>>>>>>> xception: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> object references an unsaved transient instance - >>>>>>>>>> save the transient >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> instance before flushing: >>>>>>>>>> org.hisp.dhis.indicator.Indicator >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ------ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Any suggestions please. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Aamer. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Morten Olav Hansen >>>>>>>>>> < >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> mor...@dhis2.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Aamer >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Probably what is happening is that the new database >>>>>>>>>> has some >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> constraints that the old one doesn't. We have had >>>>>>>>>> some issues with >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> hibernate in the past, and for certain databases >>>>>>>>>> that means that many of >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the constraints was not applied.. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If you look at the messages, you will see that e.g >>>>>>>>>> `shortName` >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> must be unique for data elements.. the list of >>>>>>>>>> errors is not big though, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> probably you can go through >>>>>>>>>> [truncated for moderation] >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs >>>>>>>>>> Post to : dhis2-devs@lists.launchpad.net >>>>>>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs >>>>>>>>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Lars Helge Øverland >>>>> Lead developer, DHIS 2 >>>>> University of Oslo >>>>> Skype: larshelgeoverland >>>>> l...@dhis2.org >>>>> http://www.dhis2.org <https://www.dhis2.org/> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> With Regards >>> ThoughtWorks Technologies >>> Hyderabad >>> >>> --Stay Hungry Stay Foolish!! >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lars Helge Øverland >> Lead developer, DHIS 2 >> University of Oslo >> Skype: larshelgeoverland >> l...@dhis2.org >> http://www.dhis2.org <https://www.dhis2.org/> >> >> > > > -- > With Regards > ThoughtWorks Technologies > Hyderabad > > --Stay Hungry Stay Foolish!! > -- Lars Helge Øverland Lead developer, DHIS 2 University of Oslo Skype: larshelgeoverland l...@dhis2.org http://www.dhis2.org <https://www.dhis2.org/>
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs Post to : dhis2-devs@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
