Skip to content
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

It seems possible for destroyed records to get into live arrays #2424

Closed
igorT opened this issue Oct 29, 2014 · 8 comments
Closed

It seems possible for destroyed records to get into live arrays #2424

igorT opened this issue Oct 29, 2014 · 8 comments

Comments

@igorT
Copy link
Member

igorT commented Oct 29, 2014

This shouldn't be happening, need to investigate

@igorT
Copy link
Member Author

igorT commented Oct 29, 2014

Saw this at a client app with a weird interaction between Ember 1.8 and ED. Not sure why, but seems like we should be guarding better against it.

@aaronbhansen
Copy link

We noticed this same thing a while back. On any filtered collections, we have had to add a check in the filter to ensure its not deleted on the returned results.

https://gist.github.com/aaronbhansen/7e70afc5136c7736d5f9

@andorov
Copy link

andorov commented Jan 15, 2015

I see this with Ember 1.9.1 / Ember Data v1.0.0-beta.14.1

if User hasMany Posts -
destroy (or unload) existing Post 1
create Post 2
*ok here
save Post 2
*User.posts now includes Post 1 and 2. 1 has the state 'root.deleted.saved'

if the same record is unloaded then pushed onto the store it will appear twice

Just tested 1.0.0-beta.15-canary and I see it there as well

@quaertym
Copy link

@andorov I think this was working in v1.0.0-beta.12.

@andorov
Copy link

andorov commented Jan 15, 2015

@quaertym - just tested v1.0.0-beta.12. confirmed this was not a bug there.

@quaertym
Copy link

@andorov We could not upgrade to beta.14 because of this.

@igorT
Copy link
Member Author

igorT commented May 25, 2015

I believe this was fixed, is this still an issue for you @quaertym @andorov ?

@quaertym
Copy link

No, it is fixed.

@wecc wecc closed this as completed May 25, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants