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

Definition object should contain 'type' property: Object({ type: undefined, resolve: [function resolve] }) #21871

Open
TLMondo opened this issue Mar 15, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@TLMondo
Copy link

TLMondo commented Mar 15, 2024

Describe the Bug

I made the latest update to 10.10.4 after seeing that GraphQL calls were failing. No change. I was looking at the logs and the only thing that seems related is this entry every time I try and load the Insights dashboard (which is using graphql):
[14:19:55.243] ERROR: TypeError[Profile_Use_Cases.Profile_id]: Definition object should contain 'type' property: Object({ type: undefined, resolve: [function resolve] })

One of my coworkers say they continue to get internal server error replay from the graphql api too. Looking in the UI, there IS a type of Integer for the field... but because it’s a Relationship, shouldn’t it be Alias?

I have manually compared similar fields within the directus.fields table, and matched as much as I could.

  • I've removed hidden:true
  • I've set special to m2o as some others had
  • interface:select-dropdown-m2o
  • options:{"template": "{{profile_name}}"} (I also tried adding type into there with different values like int, string, input, select, select-dropdown-m2o)
  • display:related-values

To Reproduce

  • Self-hosted Docker instance
  • Migrate from 10.10.2 to 10.10.4 (i did 10.10.3 in between as a validation)
  • Run npx directus migrate:latest from within container
  • Logged in as Admin --> Any Insights dashboard

Same issue as the following tickets, but I'm not using Supabase:

Directus Version

10.10.4

Hosting Strategy

Self-Hosted (Docker Image)

@TLMondo
Copy link
Author

TLMondo commented Mar 15, 2024

image

image (1)
image (2)
image (3)
image

@TLMondo
Copy link
Author

TLMondo commented Mar 15, 2024

I now suspect this might be a problem with it traversing foreign keys. Somehow, someone managed to either link a bunch of tables to a table that didn't exist, or it got deleted. Hunting done the foreign keys, and worse Deleting/Altering them, is proving VERY complicated.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: 🆕 Needs Triage
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant