langgenius/dify
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/langgenius/dify.git synced 2026-07-21 03:55:25 -04:00
Code Issues 775 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Full Doc mode document can't be retrieved after unarchive #11977

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-21 19:05:04 -05:00 by yindo · 2 comments
yindo commented 2026-02-21 19:05:04 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Originally created by @efreykongcn on GitHub (Mar 22, 2025).

Originally assigned to: @JohnJyong on GitHub.

Self Checks

  • This is only for bug report, if you would like to ask a question, please head to Discussions.
  • I have searched for existing issues search for existing issues, including closed ones.
  • I confirm that I am using English to submit this report (我已阅读并同意 Language Policy).
  • [FOR CHINESE USERS] 请务必使用英文提交 Issue，否则会被关闭。谢谢！:)
  • Please do not modify this template :) and fill in all the required fields.

Dify version

1.1.0

Cloud or Self Hosted

Self Hosted (Source)

Steps to reproduce

  1. Create a knowledge base, let's say: KB1
  2. Upload a document file (attached example file

FullDoc_UnArchive_Retrieve_bug_demo.md

), click Next to Chunk Settings page.
3. Select Parent-child - Full Doc - High quality - Hybrid Search, click Save & Process to Documents page
4. Go to Retrieval Testing page, test "Introduce dify", the uploaded md file is retrieved in result section.
5. Back to Documents page, select the document and click Archive, then 'UnArchive'
6. Repeat step 4, no file retrieved.

✔️ Expected Behavior

After UnArchive, mark down file should be retrieved.

❌ Actual Behavior

After UnArchive, mark down file wasn't retrieved.

Originally created by @efreykongcn on GitHub (Mar 22, 2025). Originally assigned to: @JohnJyong on GitHub. ### Self Checks - [x] This is only for bug report, if you would like to ask a question, please head to [Discussions](https://github.com/langgenius/dify/discussions/categories/general). - [x] I have searched for existing issues [search for existing issues](https://github.com/langgenius/dify/issues), including closed ones. - [x] I confirm that I am using English to submit this report (我已阅读并同意 [Language Policy](https://github.com/langgenius/dify/issues/1542)). - [x] [FOR CHINESE USERS] 请务必使用英文提交 Issue，否则会被关闭。谢谢！:) - [x] Please do not modify this template :) and fill in all the required fields. ### Dify version 1.1.0 ### Cloud or Self Hosted Self Hosted (Source) ### Steps to reproduce 1. Create a knowledge base, let's say: KB1 2. Upload a document file (attached example file [FullDoc_UnArchive_Retrieve_bug_demo.md](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/19402567/FullDoc_UnArchive_Retrieve_bug_demo.md) ), click `Next` to `Chunk Settings` page. 3. Select Parent-child - Full Doc - High quality - Hybrid Search, click `Save & Process` to `Documents` page 4. Go to `Retrieval Testing` page, test "Introduce dify", the uploaded md file is retrieved in result section. 5. Back to `Documents` page, select the document and click `Archive`, then 'UnArchive' 6. Repeat step 4, no file retrieved. ### ✔️ Expected Behavior After UnArchive, mark down file should be retrieved. ### ❌ Actual Behavior After UnArchive, mark down file wasn't retrieved.
yindo added the 🐞 bug label 2026-02-21 19:05:04 -05:00
yindo closed this issue 2026-02-21 19:05:04 -05:00
yindo commented 2026-02-21 19:05:05 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@dosubot[bot] commented on GitHub (Mar 22, 2025):

Hello, @efreykongcn! I'm here to help you with bug fixes, questions, and contributions. Let's work on resolving the issue you've encountered.

The issue you're experiencing with the "Full Doc" mode not retrieving documents after unarchiving might be related to how Dify handles document states. When a document is unarchived, it should become eligible for retrieval as long as it is not archived and is enabled [1]. However, there might be a specific issue with the "Full Doc" mode or the unarchiving process in version 1.1.0 that is preventing the document from being retrieved.

Unfortunately, I couldn't find specific information about known issues with the "Full Doc" mode in the current version. It might be helpful to check if there are any logs or error messages generated during the unarchiving process that could provide more insight into why the document is not being retrieved. Additionally, reviewing the retrieval settings and ensuring that the document is correctly processed after unarchiving might help resolve the issue.

To continue talking to Dosu, mention @dosu.

Help Dosu learn! Give it feedback: Great Response | Irrelevant Answer | Incorrect Sources | Too Verbose | Hallucination | Bug Report | Other

@dosubot[bot] commented on GitHub (Mar 22, 2025): <!-- Greeting --> Hello, @efreykongcn! I'm here to help you with bug fixes, questions, and contributions. Let's work on resolving the issue you've encountered. <!-- Answer --> The issue you're experiencing with the "Full Doc" mode not retrieving documents after unarchiving might be related to how Dify handles document states. When a document is unarchived, it should become eligible for retrieval as long as it is not archived and is enabled <sup>[[1]](https://github.com/langgenius/dify/blob/main/api/core/workflow/nodes/knowledge_retrieval/knowledge_retrieval_node.py)</sup>. However, there might be a specific issue with the "Full Doc" mode or the unarchiving process in version 1.1.0 that is preventing the document from being retrieved. Unfortunately, I couldn't find specific information about known issues with the "Full Doc" mode in the current version. It might be helpful to check if there are any logs or error messages generated during the unarchiving process that could provide more insight into why the document is not being retrieved. Additionally, reviewing the retrieval settings and ensuring that the document is correctly processed after unarchiving might help resolve the issue. <!-- Dosu Comment Footer --> *To continue talking to [Dosu](https://dosu.dev), mention @dosu.* --- <sup>Help Dosu learn! Give it feedback: [Great Response](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/c75ad492-4967-44c3-9d0a-e234a8e2c2fd?feedback_type=great_response) | [Irrelevant Answer](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/c75ad492-4967-44c3-9d0a-e234a8e2c2fd?feedback_type=irrelevant_answer) | [Incorrect Sources](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/c75ad492-4967-44c3-9d0a-e234a8e2c2fd?feedback_type=incorrect_sources) | [Too Verbose](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/c75ad492-4967-44c3-9d0a-e234a8e2c2fd?feedback_type=too_verbose) | [Hallucination](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/c75ad492-4967-44c3-9d0a-e234a8e2c2fd?feedback_type=hallucination) | [Bug Report](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/c75ad492-4967-44c3-9d0a-e234a8e2c2fd?feedback_type=bug_report) | [Other](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/c75ad492-4967-44c3-9d0a-e234a8e2c2fd?feedback_type=other)</sup>
yindo commented 2026-02-21 19:05:05 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@efreykongcn commented on GitHub (Mar 22, 2025):

According to my investigation, in source file dify/api/models/dataset.py child_chunks property line 710, due to the restriction rules.parent_mode != ParentMode.FULL_DOC, dify doesn't load child_chunks for full doc mode document, so the child_chunks can't be indexed when performing unarchive. If remove this restriction, then retrieve test works for unarchived full doc file. I'm wondering what this restriction is designed for.

child_chunks definition in dstaset.py file:

@property
    def child_chunks(self):
        process_rule = self.document.dataset_process_rule
        if process_rule.mode == "hierarchical":
            rules = Rule(**process_rule.rules_dict)
            if rules.parent_mode and rules.parent_mode != ParentMode.FULL_DOC:                
                child_chunks = (
                    db.session.query(ChildChunk)
                    .filter(ChildChunk.segment_id == self.id)
                    .order_by(ChildChunk.position.asc())
                    .all()
                )
                return child_chunks or []
            else:
                return []
        else:
            return []
@efreykongcn commented on GitHub (Mar 22, 2025): According to my investigation, in source file `dify/api/models/dataset.py` `child_chunks` property line 710, due to the restriction `rules.parent_mode != ParentMode.FULL_DOC`, dify doesn't load child_chunks for full doc mode document, so the child_chunks can't be indexed when performing unarchive. If remove this restriction, then retrieve test works for unarchived full doc file. I'm wondering what this restriction is designed for. `child_chunks` definition in dstaset.py file: ```python @property def child_chunks(self): process_rule = self.document.dataset_process_rule if process_rule.mode == "hierarchical": rules = Rule(**process_rule.rules_dict) if rules.parent_mode and rules.parent_mode != ParentMode.FULL_DOC: child_chunks = ( db.session.query(ChildChunk) .filter(ChildChunk.segment_id == self.id) .order_by(ChildChunk.position.asc()) .all() ) return child_chunks or [] else: return [] else: return [] ```
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
Knowledge Pipeline
Proposal
WIP
cloud
dependencies
feat:webapp
good first issue
outdated
performance
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 python:uv
refactor
size:L
stale
status: accepting prs
status: blocked
status: in discussion
stt & tts
vulnerablity
web
wont-fix
🌊 feat:workflow
🌚 invalid
🐞 bug
👻 feat:rag
💪 enhancement
📚 documentation
🔨 feat:tools
🙋‍♂️ question
🙏 help wanted
🤔 cant-reproduce
🤖 feat:agent
No Label 🐞 bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
yindo
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: langgenius/dify#11977
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?