-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
eng-1344 f10b upload obsidian relations and their schemas #721
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
Open
maparent
wants to merge
5
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
eng-1344-upload-relation-and-rel-schema
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
b607e4c
eng-1344 f10b upload obsidian relations and their schemas
maparent 8b471dc
sync DiscourseRelation instances, wip
maparent 197e3d6
filter schema and relation uploads by modified
maparent 116eb58
devin correction
maparent 13b342e
The reified relation has the rel type, not the triple?
maparent File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🔴
discourseRelationTypeToLocalConceptuses non-uniquelabelas conceptname, causing upsert failure and cascading errorsThe new
discourseRelationTypeToLocalConceptfunction setsname: labelwherelabelis the user-facing display label of a relation type (e.g., "Supports", "Opposes"). This can collide with the unique constraintconcept_space_and_name_idxon(space_id, name)in the database.Root Cause and Cascading Failure
The database enforces
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX concept_space_and_name_idx ON public."Concept" (space_id, name);(packages/database/supabase/schemas/concept.sql:87). Node type schemas are created withname: name(the node type's name) indiscourseNodeSchemaToLocalConcept(apps/obsidian/src/utils/conceptConversion.ts:47). The new relation type concepts usename: labelat line 77.If a relation type's
labelmatches any node type'sname(e.g., both named "Evidence"), or if two relation types share the same label, only one concept can be inserted. The SQLupsert_conceptsfunction handles this withRETURN NEXT -1(packages/database/supabase/schemas/concept.sql:379), so the relation type concept silently fails to insert.The real problem is cascading:
discourseRelationSchemaToLocalConceptat line 127 putsrelation_type: relationshipTypeIdinlocal_reference_content. When the SQL function_local_concept_to_db_conceptprocesses this, it doesSELECT cpt.id INTO STRICT ref_single_val FROM public."Concept" AS cpt WHERE cpt.source_local_id = ...(packages/database/supabase/schemas/concept.sql:316-318). Since the relation type concept was never inserted (due to the name collision),INTO STRICTthrows an unhandled exception, aborting the entireupsert_conceptscall and failing all remaining concepts in the batch.Impact: Any name collision between a relation type label and a node type name (or between two relation type labels) causes the entire concept sync to fail, preventing all node and relation data from being uploaded to Supabase.
The Roam version avoids this by using
name: getPageTitleByPageUid(relation.id)(apps/roam/src/utils/conceptConversion.ts:125), which yields a unique identifier.Was this helpful? React with 👍 or 👎 to provide feedback.