Trees with two '*' keys cause unexpected keys in PUT resource

[abalmos]

When your tree looks like this:

 const tree = {
    bookmarks: {
      _type: "application/vnd.oada.bookmarks.1+json",
      weather: {
        _type: "application/json", // TODO: Use real MediaType
        _rev: 0,
        weather-source: {
          _type: "application/json", // TODO: Use real MediaType
          _rev: 0,
          location: {
            "*": {
              _type: "application/json", // TODO: Use real MediaType
              _rev: 0,
              "year-index": {
                "*": {
                  _type: "application/json", // TODO: Use real MediaType
                  _rev: 0,
                  "month-index": {
                    "*": {
                      "day-index": {
                        "*": {
                          _type: "application/json", // TODO: Use real MediaType
                          _rev: 0,
                          data: {},
                          template: {},
                          station: {}
                        }
                      }
                    }
                  }
                }
              }
            }
          }
        }
      }
    }
  };

and you put to a path: /bookmarks/weather/weather-source/location/8/year-index/2020/month-index/01/day-index/01

You end up with keys

"day-index": {
  "01": { 
    "_rev": 2
  }
}

under the path /bookmarks/weather/weather-source/location/8/year-index/2020, which of course is too early for an day-index based on the tree. I assume this is related to having more than one '*' in the tree.

[tomohiroarakawa]

I tried the PUT request with the tree posted above, but I have not been able to reproduce the problem. Just curious, are you using oada-cache with the cache option turned on?

[abalmos]

I have been using it with cache: false. @sanoel was able to reproduce. Maybe he has a simpler case.

[aultac]

Let’s get this one added to the suite of oada-cache tests. Aaron

…

On Feb 13, 2020, at 4:12 PM, Andrew Balmos ***@***.***> wrote: I have been using it with cache: false. @sanoel <https://github.com/sanoel> was able to reproduce. Maybe he has a simpler case. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#13?email_source=notifications&email_token=AA2KEUGZ3JGX76ON6KYX2JTRCWZUXA5CNFSM4KTS2PB2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOELWUCFA#issuecomment-585974036>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA2KEUE55TIMCGJNTVGI2TLRCWZUXANCNFSM4KTS2PBQ>.

[tomohiroarakawa]

@abalmos Thanks. I will ask @sanoel .