langgenius/dify
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/langgenius/dify.git synced 2026-07-25 13:36:01 -04:00
Code Issues 775 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

[PR #9799] Marking the last piece of data on each page is a duplicate issue, which can be solved by adding the id field to the order by rig and using a unique field #26564

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-21 20:39:50 -05:00 by yindo · 0 comments
yindo commented 2026-02-21 20:39:50 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Original Pull Request: https://github.com/langgenius/dify/pull/9799

State: closed
Merged: Yes

Checklist:

Important

Please review the checklist below before submitting your pull request.

  • Please open an issue before creating a PR or link to an existing issue
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I ran dev/reformat(backend) and cd web && npx lint-staged(frontend) to appease the lint gods

Description

This problem is in the intelligent assistant Q&A function, in which the annotation option of the last piece of data on each page is duplicated, the problem here is because the value of the create_at field in the database table is the same for all records, and in the case of a large number of duplicate create_at values, the database may have errors in determining the boundaries of pagination. When the database performs a pagination query, it needs to determine which records belong to the current page, and the internal logic of the database in handling pagination is messed up with a large number of duplicate create_at values. Because it can't distinguish records based on create_at field. This can cause the database to incorrectly include the same record multiple times in the result set in some cases, especially near page boundaries. This can result in the last record on each page being duplicated.
Therefore, to solve this problem, you can use a field that can uniquely identify each record after the create_at as the main basis for sorting. When the value of the create_at id is the same, the id field will be pagination according to the value of the id field, so that the pagination can be controlled more accurately.

Fixes

Type of Change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update, included: Dify Document
  • Improvement, including but not limited to code refactoring, performance optimization, and UI/UX improvement
  • Dependency upgrade

Testing Instructions

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration

  • Test A
  • Test B
**Original Pull Request:** https://github.com/langgenius/dify/pull/9799 **State:** closed **Merged:** Yes --- # Checklist: > [!IMPORTANT] > Please review the checklist below before submitting your pull request. - [ ] Please open an issue before creating a PR or link to an existing issue - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I ran `dev/reformat`(backend) and `cd web && npx lint-staged`(frontend) to appease the lint gods # Description This problem is in the intelligent assistant Q&A function, in which the annotation option of the last piece of data on each page is duplicated, the problem here is because the value of the create_at field in the database table is the same for all records, and in the case of a large number of duplicate create_at values, the database may have errors in determining the boundaries of pagination. When the database performs a pagination query, it needs to determine which records belong to the current page, and the internal logic of the database in handling pagination is messed up with a large number of duplicate create_at values. Because it can't distinguish records based on create_at field. This can cause the database to incorrectly include the same record multiple times in the result set in some cases, especially near page boundaries. This can result in the last record on each page being duplicated. Therefore, to solve this problem, you can use a field that can uniquely identify each record after the create_at as the main basis for sorting. When the value of the create_at id is the same, the id field will be pagination according to the value of the id field, so that the pagination can be controlled more accurately. Fixes ## Type of Change - [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - [ ] This change requires a documentation update, included: [Dify Document](https://github.com/langgenius/dify-docs) - [ ] Improvement, including but not limited to code refactoring, performance optimization, and UI/UX improvement - [ ] Dependency upgrade # Testing Instructions Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration - [ ] Test A - [ ] Test B
yindo added the pull-request label 2026-02-21 20:39:50 -05:00
yindo closed this issue 2026-02-21 20:39:50 -05:00
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 pull-request
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#26564
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?