-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 37
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
A specific value from list is not always exported #1167
Comments
Eureka ! |
On February 21 we added relation many-to-many between Classification Attribute and List Option entities. This allows to choose options for an attribute that can only be used in a particular classification. |
I can´t recreate the problem in demo. |
is it solved? Do the problem exists within the last versions of our software? |
Hi, the problem still exist in 1.9.13. But the workaround is to sort the export by the field DESC, or exclude the products that have null as the value. |
Hello
I have an unusual and strange problem.
I have an export job of products that exports, among other things, a self-created product field of the list type.
The list has 7 choices, one of which has a value in the form of two words with a space between them.
("Quote", "Prototype", "New part", "Normal", "Obsolete" ...)
When the export job has filters on a given classification, only this two-word choice becomes empty in the export file, the other choices are included. (ca 1600 products)
But if I add a classification to the filter to get more products in the export (ca4700 products), the selection is included in the export file even on the products that previously did not receive the value.
It seems the export cant handle the two word value until I have more or less products to export, but the job is suppose to export the given classification.
I can reproduce the error in new export job.
I have the same error both in PROD and TEST environment.
I can't reproduce it on your demo.
I updated to the latest version last morning.
The bug has been with us since the 22nd of February, it worked on the 21st.
Have you ever heard of anything like this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: