setSortBy on includedFrom field gives warning and lacks table name

[claudiobosticco]

SmartClient Version: v13.0p_2023-08-15/Enterprise Development Only (built 2023-08-15)

Oracle 19c

Hello, if I add a dsRequest.setSortBy on a field which is includedFrom, I see this WARN:

WARN SQLOrderClause Building order by clause, could not locate the correct index for includeFrom field ROLE (AUTH_ROLES.ROLE)

and the fieldName in the "order by" lacks the table name.

Could you please explain what is causing the warning and if it's the reason for not having the table name before the column name? Is it expected?

The field is defined as:

 <field name="ROLE" type="text" includeFrom="AUTH_ROLES.ROLE" includeVia="ID_ROLE_FK"/>

and the foreign key field:

 <field name="ID_ROLE_FK" type="integer" foreignKey="AUTH_ROLES.ID_REC" relatedTableAlias="ROLES" required="true"/>

please let me know if you need more details.

[claudiobosticco]

Hello, I would appreciate any comments or feedback. :)

[Isomorphic]

Apologies for the delay on this one - it's assigned and we'll update here when we have more information.

[Isomorphic]

This one is an example of unpredictable behavior we've mentioned in other thread of yours, because of the setup. Once the duplicate includeFrom is removed, there will be no warning.

[claudiobosticco]

Hello, after your explanation in the other thread, I've changed my dataSource so that I've got only one

includeFrom="AUTH_ROLES.ROLE"

and the other field has a customSelectExpression.

This way, everything works also with 13.1, so far so good.

But I still see the warning

WARN SQLOrderClause Building order by clause, could not locate the correct index for includeFrom field ROLE (AUTH_ROLES.ROLE)

and actually even if I comment out the field with the customSelectExpression, I still see the warning.

Do you need an actual test case?

[Isomorphic]

No need for the test case, thank you. It's fixed now and will be available in the 2023-09-22 nightly build (tomorrow).

[claudiobosticco]

SmartClient Version: v13.0p_2023-09-22/Enterprise Deployment (built 2023-09-22)

actually I'm still seeing the WARN message.


besides that, you didn't comment about this:

[cut] and the fieldName in the "order by" lacks the table name.

Could you please explain what is causing the warning and if it's the reason for not having the table name before the column name? Is it expected?

I mean, I don't remember if it's always been like that, but why not use the table/alias name?