Replies: 8 comments
-
Yes, I've noticed this too. So +1 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I think we can tackle this one in our relationship work in 2.8 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Needs retest in 2.8 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@sc0ttkclark This can't be tested in 2.8, because the Bi-directional field does not populate with any fields with which to make a bi-directional relationship. See #6032 — needs resolution before #4644 can be tested. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Once the other issue is resolved, this should be noted that it's not a guarantee that the enhancement this issue describes will work. I'm just interested to find out if it was fixed as a result of some of our other work. If not, we will punt this to 2.9 for backend work to be done. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Ready for QA test @pdclark |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
QA didn't pass — bi-directional field could be selected in 2.8, but fields did not auto-associate bi-directionally. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Gotcha, we will move this to 2.9 and try to tackle it on the field save process. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I had a pod with a standard relationship, which contains a bunch of data.
Next, I wanted to make that relationship bidirectional. However, I'm not able to connect the already existing data in a bidirectional way unless I re-save each of the 5000+ posts. For already-existing data, the relationship is still one way even after I change the field to bidirectional. For new data the field is bidirectional.
Is there a way to accomplish this so that when a bidirectional relationship is created, the existing data is updated and shows up without manually re-saving thousands of pieces of content?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions