-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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
folders/bookmarks are duplicate when a device is re-added to sync chain #2443
Comments
With debug master build got a failed DCHECK
|
With Android 1.0.71(sync2) and brave-core
I don't see the original issue, but I see folders are duplicated: This happened because when brave-core was removed from sync, its sync-related data was cleared, included the object ids for bookmarks. |
@darkh @AlexeyBarabash Any more status on this issue? Can you guys ping @srirambv? About to release 58.x and we want this issue addressed. |
@srirambv testes this issue without the fix of #2133 |
In order to solve this we have to preserve meta info like "object_id", "order", "sync_timestamp", "last_send_time" and "last_updated_time". so that we can connect to existing sync chain
--
device c will never get old data from device b, although device b will have
so I propose we keep duplicate entries behavior which means when a device disconnect from sync chain, all its data will be new no matter which sync chain it connects to later |
@darkdh |
moving to 0.59 per last sync meeting |
Verification passed on
Verified passed with
Verified passed with
|
Description
Folder structure is not maintained when a device is readded to sycn chain. Follow up to #2133
Steps to Reproduce
Actual result:
Bookmarks file used
brave_sorted_1000.zip
Expected result:
Should not mess up folder structure after device is added back to the sync chain
Reproduces how often:
Easy
Brave version (brave://version info)
1.0.71 (Sync1) on Android
0.58.11 Beta on Linux
Reproducible on current release:
Website problems only:
Additional Information
cc: @darkdh @AlexeyBarabash @brave/legacy_qa
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: