dhis2-devs team mailing list archive

[Lars Helge Øverland <lars@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Vanya,

sure. We definitely try to avoid this. See previous email in thread. The
operand constraint has been removed. We will include not-null constraints
in the upgrade notes.

For 2.25 <https://www.dhis2.org/225-upgrade> we will set the "created" and
"lastupdated" columns of tables of "identifiable objects" to not-null.

best regards,

Lars


On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Vanya Seth <vanyas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Morten and Lars
>
> There are certain key points highlighted in the above email. Whenever a
> new DHIS2 version comes out there are new integrity constraints added but
> thats not part of the release or the upgrade notes.  So, whats the right
> way to get information about these constraints?
>
> When we deploy the new war we assume that the TableAlteror will take care
> of modifying the schema and also take care of adding the new constraints.
> But in case the existing data does not abide by these constraints how do we
> apply them?
>
> So, principally after a successful redeploy of the war of a higher version
> can we say that the DHIS instance has been upgraded in its true sense.
> As of now it seems the war does get updated but the underlying database
> does not.
>
> Needless to say this breaks the export /import of metadata downstream.
>
> Any insights about this would be appreciated.
>
> Regards
> Vanya
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Aamer Mohammed <aamerm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> For continuation of testing, we changed the metadata to ensure that a
>> Group can be part of only one GroupSet.
>> 1) We got the below issue.
>> {"status":"ERROR","stats":{"total":1,"created":0,"updated":
>> 0,"deleted":0,"ignored":1},"typeReports":[{"klass":"org.hisp
>> .dhis.indicator.Indicator","stats":{"total":1,"created":0,
>> "updated":0,"deleted":0,"ignored":1},"objectReports":[{"
>> klass":"org.hisp.dhis.indicator.Indicator","index":277,"uid"
>> :"oMbElS3lhOO","errorReports":[{"message":"Missing required property
>> `numerator`.","mainKlass":"org.hisp.dhis.indicator.Indicator
>> ","errorKlass":"java.lang.String","errorCode":"E4000"}]}]}]}
>>
>> which means that Numerator is required field for an indicator. This was
>> not the case in 2.21. This restriction was introduced in some version after
>> 2.21. However, we modified the metadata for the indicator having this issue
>> and proceeded further.
>>
>> 2) Now we got the below issue.
>> {"httpStatus":"Internal Server Error","httpStatusCode":500,"s
>> tatus":"ERROR","message":"ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique
>> constraint \"dataelement_operand_unique_key\"\n  Detail: Key
>> (dataelementid, categoryoptioncomboid)=(4497, 3576) already exists."}
>>
>> This means that you cannot have duplicate combination of (dataelementid,
>> categoryoptioncomboid) in dataelementoperand table. This constraint was not
>> present in 2.21 version.
>> When we see dataelementoperand table, there are lot of such duplicates.
>> We would like to understand more around this constraint and why it was
>> introduced.
>> *Is there any note which has the details about the constraints being
>> introduced in a DHIS version?*
>>
>> 3) Also this constraint (dataelement_operand_unique_key) is not present
>> in the instance which was upgraded from 2.21 to 2.24. But it is present in
>> the instance which is directly on 2.24. Any thoughts on this. Did the
>> constraint not get created in upgraded instance because the data was not
>> abiding to the constraint rules? What happens in a dhis upgrade if there is
>> any constraint being introduced and existing data does not confirm to the
>> constraint? Please suggest.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Aamer.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Lars Helge Øverland <lars@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Aamer,
>>>
>>> the problem here happens because the hibernate mapping between GroupSet
>>> and Group is one-to-many, ie. a Group can only be part of one GroupSet.
>>>
>>> There is a reason for this, but it is not very good ;) When we store
>>> favorites with group sets, we need to know which dimension (GroupSet) a
>>> dimension item (Group) is part of. If the Group is part of many GroupSets,
>>> we need another link object in between to represent which dimension it is
>>> part of. This can clearly be done and this is something we plan to fix, but
>>> it is a bit of work and it requires an upgrade routine to upgrade existing
>>> databases.
>>>
>>> So I am pretty sure that is why you see these duplicates: You have
>>> groups which are part of multiple group sets. In these cases, Hibernate
>>> will create duplicate GroupSets as a result of the database integrity issue.
>>>
>>> So short term solution is to change the metadata, long term we will fix
>>> this properly and allow for many-to-many between Group and GroupSet.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Lars
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Morten Olav Hansen <morten@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Aamer
>>>>
>>>> Lars knows what is wrong, he will provide a fix shortly :)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Morten Olav Hansen
>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2
>>>> University of Oslo
>>>> http://www.dhis2.org
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Aamer Mohammed <
>>>> aamerm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Morten. Let us know if any other details are required from our
>>>>> end in this regard.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Aamer.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Morten Olav Hansen <morten@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> That's interesting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Lars any suggestions why this happens? I guess there is something
>>>>>> wrong with our mapping. Will have a look tomorrow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen
>>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2
>>>>>> University of Oslo
>>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Victor Garcia <vgarciabnz@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Morten, Sultan,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think we know the reason of duplicates: categoryOptionGroups are
>>>>>>> shared between categoryOptionGroupSets, for example, ">= 15" is
>>>>>>> used in three categoryOptionGroupSets (Paediatrics, HIV and general). In
>>>>>>> the API, categoryOptionGroups appear duplicated as many times as they are
>>>>>>> re-used.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We don't know if sharing categoryOptionGroups is something to avoid,
>>>>>>> but it seems to be the cause of this issue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Víctor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12 September 2016 at 09:41, Morten Olav Hansen <morten@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi again
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would it be possible to share your database with me? I haven't seen
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> issues anywhere else.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen
>>>>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2
>>>>>>>> University of Oslo
>>>>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Sultanahamar Mohammad <
>>>>>>>> sultanm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > Hi Morten,
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > This is what our table is showing up when we say \d dataelement.
>>>>>>>> I think
>>>>>>>> > there is nothing suspicious out here.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > ​
>>>>>>>> > Regards,
>>>>>>>> > Sultan Ahamar.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Morten Olav Hansen <
>>>>>>>> morten@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >> I'm not sure what is causing it, but it shouldn't be allowed to
>>>>>>>> begin
>>>>>>>> >> with. Is there any constraint on the UID column in your database?
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> [image: Inline image 1]
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> --
>>>>>>>> >> Morten Olav Hansen
>>>>>>>> >> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2
>>>>>>>> >> University of Oslo
>>>>>>>> >> http://www.dhis2.org
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Sultanahamar Mohammad <
>>>>>>>> >> sultanm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >>> Hi Morten,
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>> Hope you are doing good. Let us know your thoughts on the above
>>>>>>>> issue
>>>>>>>> >>> and please let us know if you need any information that you
>>>>>>>> might require.
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> >>> Sultan Ahamar.
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Sultanahamar Mohammad <
>>>>>>>> >>> sultanm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> Hi Morten,
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> We have pulled latest code from 2.24 and tried import /
>>>>>>>> export again.
>>>>>>>> >>>> We have some interesting observations
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> *DB snapshot:*
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> ​
>>>>>>>> >>>> There are no duplicate items in DB. We double checked.
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> *Entity endpoint snapshot:*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> ​Interestingly we found few duplicate entities when we try to
>>>>>>>> fetch
>>>>>>>> >>>> this data through the API. In Maintenance app, we are not able
>>>>>>>> to see these
>>>>>>>> >>>> duplicate entities. Does it also explain why we get repeating
>>>>>>>> entries (with
>>>>>>>> >>>> same UID's) in the full export JSON as well?  Let us know on
>>>>>>>> how to proceed
>>>>>>>> >>>> and if you need more input.
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> Thanks for all the help in advance.
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> >>>> Sultan Ahamar.
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Morten Olav Hansen <
>>>>>>>> morten@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>> >>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> Hi Vanya
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> This should now have been fixed in master and 224. It will
>>>>>>>> now do a
>>>>>>>> >>>>> global UID check first, and report back any duplicates, if it
>>>>>>>> finds a
>>>>>>>> >>>>> duplicate it will remove them from the import and report back
>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>> >>>>> `ErrorReport` (as it would do with other validation issues).
>>>>>>>> So if it finds
>>>>>>>> >>>>> a duplicate, you will need to set atomic mode to NONE to have
>>>>>>>> it import and
>>>>>>>> >>>>> ignore the duplicates.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> (btw, there was several duplicates in your file, not sure how
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> >>>>> happened.. maybe something needs to be cleaned in your source
>>>>>>>> instance)
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> --
>>>>>>>> >>>>> Morten Olav Hansen
>>>>>>>> >>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2
>>>>>>>> >>>>> University of Oslo
>>>>>>>> >>>>> http://www.dhis2.org
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Morten Olav Hansen <
>>>>>>>> morten@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Vanya
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> This should have been caught by the importer... but there
>>>>>>>> are several
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> duplicates without the file you sent me, MaO4Ik8f34O is used
>>>>>>>> in 3 category
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> option groups, same with oqeVQ71LCgY..
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> I will look into making the validation process more robust..
>>>>>>>> but at
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> least you should know that this file have issues
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> University of Oslo
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Morten Olav Hansen <
>>>>>>>> morten@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ok, thanks Vanya, I'm looking into it now
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> University of Oslo
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Vanya Seth <
>>>>>>>> vanyas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Morten
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for the response.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We ran into another issue while trying to do a full export
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> import.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As per the previous conversations we took care of all data
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> migrations (as per the new constraints on the DB- pretty
>>>>>>>> much caught by the
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Importer during the validation phase itself).
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Having done that we run into this issue:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The 'categoryoptiongroup' import is failing with constraint
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> violation for the UID. We checked the data and there is no
>>>>>>>> repeating UID in
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the  database.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The error text is attached for your reference, as well the
>>>>>>>> payload
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> used for the import.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for all the help in advance.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Vanya
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Morten Olav Hansen <
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> morten@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks Aamer, I'm looking at a similar bug right now..
>>>>>>>> seems some
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> objects don't get their deps properly attached..
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> University of Oslo
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Aamer Mohammed <
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> aamerm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Morten,
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please find the payload for below request
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *curl -H "Content-Type: application/json" -X GET -u
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> username:password
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "http://localhost:8888/api/24/
>>>>>>>> metadata?filter=created:gt:2016-07
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <http://localhost:8888/api/24/
>>>>>>>> metadata?filter=created:gt:2016-07>" >
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> metadata.224.newapi.created.json*
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Import the payload in a fresh instance for import using
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *curl -H "Content-Type: application/json" -X POST --data
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> @metadata.224.newapi.created.json -u admin:district
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> “http://localhost:8080/api/24/metadata?atomicMode=NONE
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <http://localhost:8080/api/24/metadata?atomicMode=NONE>”
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> output_created_besteffort.txt*
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If the same payload is run with atomicMode=ALL, I am
>>>>>>>> getting
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 'Invalid references' errors which is acceptable. But if
>>>>>>>> it is run with
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> atomicMode=NONE, it is throwing the error for which the
>>>>>>>> complete stack
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> trace is attached earlier. filename: '
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *output_created_besteffort_trace.txt'*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Let me know if the complete payload or any other details
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> required from my end.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Aamer.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Morten Olav Hansen <
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> morten@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Aamer
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Could you please share the payload of the object where
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> happen?
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Morten Olav Hansen
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Senior Engineer, DHIS 2
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> University of Oslo
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.dhis2.org
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:13 PM, Aamer Mohammed <
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> aamerm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Morten,
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The Importer was run with atomicMode=ALL. Though the
>>>>>>>> payload is
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> huge, only few errors were shown in ImportSummary. As
>>>>>>>> per errors in
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> previous ImportSummary, I have done below.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) ensured the 'short name' field is unique for each
>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 'data elements' and 'data element group' as well
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) UID of admin, Super User, tracked entity was
>>>>>>>> changed in
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> payload to be same to where it is getting imported.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have manually resolved them and ran the importer
>>>>>>>> again with
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> atomicMode=ALL.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I got exception as attached in trace file
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 'output_besteffort_trace.txt'
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Would these kind of issues be known only after the
>>>>>>>> import has
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> failed? and we need to resolve them one-by-one and
>>>>>>>> as-and-when the importer
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> throws them? Is there any note which has the details
>>>>>>>> about the constraints
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> being introduced in a new DHIS version?
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, If we export a filtered set of metadata
>>>>>>>> using '
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> /api/24/metadata?filter=lastUpdated:gt:2016-05' and
>>>>>>>> run the
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> importer with atomicMode=NONE
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *curl -H "Content-Type: application/json" -X POST
>>>>>>>> --data
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> @metadata.224.newapi.json -u admin:district
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> “http://localhost:8080/api/24/metadata?atomicMode=NONE
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <http://localhost:8080/api/24/metadata?atomicMode=NONE>”
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> output_created_besteffort_trace.txt*
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Getting below exception in trace. Complete trace also
>>>>>>>> attached.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> * INFO 2016-08-26 15:58:38,217 (admin) Creating 57
>>>>>>>> object(s) of
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> type ReportTable (DefaultObjectBundleService.java
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [qtp289378424-12]) org.hibernate.TransientObjectE
>>>>>>>> xception:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> object references an unsaved transient instance - save
>>>>>>>> the transient
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> instance before flushing:
>>>>>>>> org.hisp.dhis.indicator.Indicator
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Any suggestions please.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Aamer.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Morten Olav Hansen <
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> morten@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Aamer
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Probably what is happening is that the new database
>>>>>>>> has some
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> constraints that the old one doesn't. We have had
>>>>>>>> some issues with
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> hibernate in the past, and for certain databases that
>>>>>>>> means that many of
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the constraints was not applied..
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If you look at the messages, you will see that e.g
>>>>>>>> `shortName`
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> must be unique for data elements.. the list of errors
>>>>>>>> is not big though,
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> probably you can go through
>>>>>>>> [truncated for moderation]
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs
>>>>>>>> Post to     : dhis2-devs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs
>>>>>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lars Helge Øverland
>>> Lead developer, DHIS 2
>>> University of Oslo
>>> Skype: larshelgeoverland
>>> lars@xxxxxxxxx
>>> http://www.dhis2.org <https://www.dhis2.org/>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> With Regards
> ThoughtWorks Technologies
> Hyderabad
>
> --Stay Hungry Stay Foolish!!
>



-- 
Lars Helge Øverland
Lead developer, DHIS 2
University of Oslo
Skype: larshelgeoverland
lars@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.dhis2.org <https://www.dhis2.org/>