Uploaded image for project: 'Kuali Rice Development'
  1. Kuali Rice Development
  2. KULRICE-2067

Copying without changing the name (or other Unique Constraint fields) seems to allow for submission but actually throws a unique constraint

    Details

    • Type: Bug Fix
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Critical
    • Resolution: Won't Fix
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: Not version specific
    • Component/s: Development
    • Labels:
      None
    • Rice Module:
      KIM
    • Application Requirement:
      Rice

      Description

      We need a business rules class for each maintainable that can check to make sure that any unique key constraints are checked at the app level. Basically logic to check and make sure that the values aren't the same has to be written.

      This should get triggered on submit.

        Attachments

          Activity

          Hide
          abyrne Ailish Byrne added a comment -

          this sounds really weird aaron - the ns automatically takes care of this for bos in kfs. e.g. here is the message for project code...

          Errors Found in Document: "The key(s) specified for this Maintenance Document (Project Code) already exist in the system. This is not allowed when creating a new object."

          Show
          abyrne Ailish Byrne added a comment - this sounds really weird aaron - the ns automatically takes care of this for bos in kfs. e.g. here is the message for project code... Errors Found in Document: "The key(s) specified for this Maintenance Document (Project Code) already exist in the system. This is not allowed when creating a new object."
          Hide
          agodert Aaron Godert (Inactive) added a comment -

          Thanks Ailish, I'll take a look at that. I'm wondering if the issue is that the "name" attribute in my case isn't the PK, just a UK. The PK is actually an auto-incrementing number field. Is there some flag that I can set?

          Show
          agodert Aaron Godert (Inactive) added a comment - Thanks Ailish, I'll take a look at that. I'm wondering if the issue is that the "name" attribute in my case isn't the PK, just a UK. The PK is actually an auto-incrementing number field. Is there some flag that I can set?
          Hide
          abyrne Ailish Byrne added a comment -

          ah yes. i see. i don't think there is right now. although we created the duplicateIdentificationFields property to deal with a similar issue on global collections. i think a property would make sense, if you decide to go that route instead of a rule - might think about piggy backing / naming similarly to duplicateIdentificationFields

          thanks!

          Show
          abyrne Ailish Byrne added a comment - ah yes. i see. i don't think there is right now. although we created the duplicateIdentificationFields property to deal with a similar issue on global collections. i think a property would make sense, if you decide to go that route instead of a rule - might think about piggy backing / naming similarly to duplicateIdentificationFields thanks!
          Hide
          ewestfal Eric Westfall added a comment -

          This is an old issue for the first implementation of KIM screens. closing as won't fix.

          Show
          ewestfal Eric Westfall added a comment - This is an old issue for the first implementation of KIM screens. closing as won't fix.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Unassigned
              Reporter:
              agodert Aaron Godert (Inactive)
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              0 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: