SIRI-1042 fix not working unique-check on changing a within value #670
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Until now 2 entities which were created with ok within constraint can be edited later by changing the within-value to the same as one other without an error. So the unique-check only was executed if the explicit value changed, not if the within-value changed. This now will be ensured and to not check the uniqueness too ofter we filter on the mappings from the within. - fixes: SIRI-1042
- one for checking uniqueness on change of the value - one for checking uniqueness on change of the within value - fixes: SIRI-1042
- fixes: SiRI-1042
this was broken due to already existant entities with new unique constraint - fixes: SIRI-1042
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
If some has a unique-check with a within-column and the within-column value changes until now this was an available way to surround a unique-check on editing the value later... This will fix this buggy "workaround"
Also add some fitting test-cases for this use case
Additional Notes
Checklist