https://www.redmine.org/https://www.redmine.org/favicon.ico?16793021292018-09-20T08:22:18ZRedmineRedmine - Defect #29581: Issues in paginated views may be lost because sorting criteria are not uniquehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/29581?journal_id=874522018-09-20T08:22:18ZMizuki ISHIKAWA
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> <a href="/attachments/21458">fix-29581.patch</a> <a class="icon-only icon-download" title="Download" href="/attachments/download/21458/fix-29581.patch">fix-29581.patch</a> added</li></ul><p>I wrote a patch to solve this problem.</p>
<p>I fixed to add unique fields (ex: issues.id, time_entries.id) as sort criteria.</p> Redmine - Defect #29581: Issues in paginated views may be lost because sorting criteria are not uniquehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/29581?journal_id=877252018-10-01T09:09:01ZGo MAEDA
<ul><li><strong>Target version</strong> set to <i>4.1.0</i></li></ul><p>Setting target version to 4.1.0.</p> Redmine - Defect #29581: Issues in paginated views may be lost because sorting criteria are not uniquehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/29581?journal_id=923742019-06-17T05:30:23Zvzvu 3k6k
<ul></ul><blockquote>
<code>order_option += ['issues.id ASC'] unless order_option.include?("issues.id DESC") || order_option.include?("issues.id ASC")</code>
</blockquote>
<p>Is it ok to use `issues.id ASC` as a default implicit order?</p>
<code>IssueQuery#default_sort_criteria</code> uses <code>issues.id DESC</code>.
<p>(Pair-reviewed with <a href="https://github.com/maimai77" class="external">maimai77</a>)</p> Redmine - Defect #29581: Issues in paginated views may be lost because sorting criteria are not uniquehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/29581?journal_id=923842019-06-18T05:25:39ZMizuki ISHIKAWA
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> <a href="/attachments/23332">fix-29581-v2.patch</a> <a class="icon-only icon-download" title="Download" href="/attachments/download/23332/fix-29581-v2.patch">fix-29581-v2.patch</a> added</li></ul><p>vzvu 3k6k wrote:</p>
<blockquote><blockquote>
<code>order_option += ['issues.id ASC'] unless order_option.include?("issues.id DESC") || order_option.include?("issues.id ASC")</code>
</blockquote>
<p>Is it ok to use `issues.id ASC` as a default implicit order?</p>
<code>IssueQuery#default_sort_criteria</code> uses <code>issues.id DESC</code>.
<p>(Pair-reviewed with <a href="https://github.com/maimai77" class="external">maimai77</a>)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thank you for reviewing fix-29581.patch.</p>
<p>As you point out, it seems natural to use the same sort criteria as IssueQuery#default_sort_criteria.<br />I have attached the file to fixed patch.</p> Redmine - Defect #29581: Issues in paginated views may be lost because sorting criteria are not uniquehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/29581?journal_id=923892019-06-18T12:06:16Zvzvu 3k6k
<ul></ul><p>Thank you for your response! Your v2 patch looks good to me.</p> Redmine - Defect #29581: Issues in paginated views may be lost because sorting criteria are not uniquehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/29581?journal_id=923932019-06-18T15:51:30ZSeiei Miyagi
<ul></ul><blockquote>
<p>'issues.id DESC'</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Is it OK to write table name of the Issue model directly?<br />In app/models/issue_query.rb, It seems code like following is more preferable.</p>
<pre>
"#{Issue.table_name}.id DESC"
</pre> Redmine - Defect #29581: Issues in paginated views may be lost because sorting criteria are not uniquehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/29581?journal_id=923972019-06-19T00:19:41ZMizuki ISHIKAWA
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> <a href="/attachments/23335">fix-29581-v3.patch</a> <a class="icon-only icon-download" title="Download" href="/attachments/download/23335/fix-29581-v3.patch">fix-29581-v3.patch</a> added</li></ul><p>Seiei Miyagi wrote:</p>
<blockquote><blockquote>
<p>'issues.id DESC'</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Is it OK to write table name of the Issue model directly?<br />In app/models/issue_query.rb, It seems code like following is more preferable.</p>
<p>[...]</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thank you for pointing it out.<br />I changed the way of writing table names.</p> Redmine - Defect #29581: Issues in paginated views may be lost because sorting criteria are not uniquehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/29581?journal_id=924352019-06-20T06:13:35ZJean-Philippe Langjp_lang@yahoo.fr
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>New</i> to <i>Closed</i></li><li><strong>Assignee</strong> set to <i>Jean-Philippe Lang</i></li><li><strong>Resolution</strong> set to <i>Fixed</i></li></ul><p>Patch committed, thanks.</p> Redmine - Defect #29581: Issues in paginated views may be lost because sorting criteria are not uniquehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/29581?journal_id=934002019-08-30T13:46:27ZGo MAEDA
<ul><li><strong>Has duplicate</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-1 status-5 priority-4 priority-default closed" href="/issues/31924">Defect #31924</a>: Paging misses some entries</i> added</li></ul> Redmine - Defect #29581: Issues in paginated views may be lost because sorting criteria are not uniquehttps://www.redmine.org/issues/29581?journal_id=970602020-04-02T06:46:30ZGo MAEDA
<ul><li><strong>Related to</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-1 status-5 priority-4 priority-default closed" href="/issues/32737">Defect #32737</a>: Duplicate sort keys for issue query cause SQL error with SQL Server</i> added</li></ul>