Closed (won't fix)
Project:
Features
Version:
6.x-1.2
Component:
Code
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Bug report
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
3 May 2010 at 20:06 UTC
Updated:
23 Aug 2012 at 19:10 UTC
I have a feature that adds 2 similar content types that have a shared CCK field, it throws a duplicate key error, but works properly afterward:
user warning: Duplicate entry '624' for key 'PRIMARY' query: INSERT INTO content_field_introduction (vid, nid, field_introduction_value) SELECT vid, nid, field_introduction_value FROM content_type_industry_blog_entry in /Users/tstackhouse/Sites/jpma/public/sites/all/modules/cck/includes/content.admin.inc on line 1553.
Not sure if this belongs here or in the bugreports for CCK, but I haven't had issues with this using the Content Copy module, so I can only assume it's Features.
Comments
Comment #1
deverman commentedDid you ever figure this out? We are having a problem where when we use a shared field between two content types in a feature it wipes out the data in one of our fields (not all our shared fields). We are not able to solve this.
Comment #2
Grayside commentedHow similar are the machine names involved, and are you using multiple features to export the two "copies" of the field?
Comment #3
tstackhouse commentedThe issue was caused from having a shared field between 2 content types. That is, reusing an existing field when adding the fields to the types. This caused the field to be exported twice, than imported twice generating the error. The error itself is technically harmless, as the field is already there.
As to the issue you're having, I'm not certain, though it sounds like it may not be related, IMO.
Comment #4
tommyk commentedI have the same issue as #1.
If enabling a feature that converts a field into a shared field, the data in the original instance of the field will be lost. I actually tried just manually creating a content type and adding an already existing field to it. The data was lost as well.
Comment #5
mpotter commentedClosing this for lack of activity. Please re-open this issue if you can reproduce it in the latest version.