Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.
And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.
Weird behavior with "in:" clause on a findMany() with orderBy + take
See original GitHub issueBug description
Hey all, I hope you are doing well.
I’m running into a strange issue.
It seems like when there is a moderately large amount (12k+) of terms inside an “in:” clause on a findMany, with orderBy and take, it seems to give completely strange results.
But when the in clause is taken out, or the amount of terms inside are decreased; or if the take clause is taken out, it seems to function normally. Will post code examples detailing this.
How to reproduce
We are assuming a collection called “item”, and that this collection has at least 12k+ records.
const allItems = await context.prisma.item.findMany();
const allItemIds = allitems.map(({ id }) => id);
const filteredItems = await context.prisma.item.findMany({
where: {
id: {
in: allItemIds,
},
},
orderBy: {
updatedAt: 'desc',
},
take: 3,
});
return items;
For me, this does not return the items ordered correctly, nor does it return only three records.
Expected behavior
I expect it to return three items sorted in descending order by my updatedAt field.
The three cases in which this works as expected at the moment
-
If the amount of items inside the in: clause is reduced drastically
-
The in clause is dropped
const allItems = await context.prisma.item.findMany();
const allItemIds = allitems.map(({ id }) => id);
const filteredItems = await context.prisma.item.findMany({
//where: {
// id: {
// in: allItemIds,
// },
//},
orderBy: {
updatedAt: 'desc',
},
take: 3,
});
return items;
- The take clause is dropped
const allItems = await context.prisma.item.findMany();
const allItemIds = allitems.map(({ id }) => id);
const filteredItems = await context.prisma.item.findMany({
where: {
id: {
in: allItemIds,
},
},
orderBy: {
updatedAt: 'desc',
},
//take: 3,
});
return items;
Prisma information
Information covered above.
Environment & setup
- OS: MacOS / Ubuntu
- Database: MySQL 8.0.21
- Node.js version: 12.16.1
Prisma Version
prisma : 2.22.1
@prisma/client : 2.22.1
Current platform : darwin
Query Engine : query-engine 60cc71d884972ab4e897f0277c4b84383dddaf6c (at node_modules/prisma/node_modules/@prisma/engines/query-engine-darwin)
Migration Engine : migration-engine-cli 60cc71d884972ab4e897f0277c4b84383dddaf6c (at node_modules/prisma/node_modules/@prisma/engines/migration-engine-darwin)
Introspection Engine : introspection-core 60cc71d884972ab4e897f0277c4b84383dddaf6c (at node_modules/prisma/node_modules/@prisma/engines/introspection-engine-darwin)
Format Binary : prisma-fmt 60cc71d884972ab4e897f0277c4b84383dddaf6c (at node_modules/prisma/node_modules/@prisma/engines/prisma-fmt-darwin)
Default Engines Hash : 60cc71d884972ab4e897f0277c4b84383dddaf6c
Studio : 0.379.0
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 2 years ago
- Reactions:2
- Comments:13 (7 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Top Related Medium Post
Top Related StackOverflow Question
Troubleshoot Live Code
Top Related Reddit Thread
Top Related Hackernoon Post
Top Related Tweet
Top Related Dev.to Post
Top Related Hashnode Post
I just tested this, enabled NAPI preview, re-generated, and am still running into the issue, thank you!
Hey there janpio!
I’ll check around and see if I am able to share the problematic collection, but I am worried that for reasons I will be unable.
Here is an example of my specified query using