Refresh of data view appears to delete associated entity

1
I have a data view that has three associated data views on the same form linked by entity (path) over the association. All the associated entities have 1:1 relationships to the enclosing entity. These related entities are all created (but not commited) in a microflow that then loads the form. All objects are present when the form is loaded and can be edited. However on the enclosing data view screen there are some fields that trigger microflows after update that include a change object action that does not 'commit' but has 'refresh in client' set to yes as it updates the enclosing objects fields based on the first response. The strange part is that one of the associated entities appears to be deleted when the microflow is run while the other two remain. As far as I can see the three associations are set up the same as is their referencing on the web form. Has anyone come across anything similar or have any ideas as to where I am going wrong or is there something that I am missing?
asked
2 answers
0

David I am not sure what your updating microflows do, but I would look closely at the way those microflows update the enclosing entity and the 3 associated entities. A one to one relationship means that an object in entity A can be related to only one object in entity B. I have seen similar behavior with one to one associations where I updated entity B so that it was related to a different object in entity A. So it appeared that the entity B object was not saved or was deleted, but in reality it was attached to a different object in entity A than the one I had open.

Hope that helps.

Mike

answered
0

I have now done some further work and have discovered that if I add another 1:1 association and add it onto a new nested data view referenced over the association as per the one that was failing then the last one added fails in the same way that I had noticed as in my original post. If I then delete the last data view I had just created then the one that was previously failing now works correctly. Strange but true.

answered