Repository navigation
fix: avoid duplicate legacy rows in channel reports - #76
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What Problem This Solves
Fixes aggregate channel reports counting legacy rows twice when the same channel also has versioned data files.
User Impact
Mixed-layout datasets retain every row once, in chronological order. Legacy-only and versioned-only channels remain supported.
Why This Change Was Made
The aggregate reader loaded each legacy file directly and then loaded it again while reading that channel’s directory. It now discovers unique channel IDs and uses the existing per-channel reader once per channel.
Evidence
The regression fixture returns five rows from four inputs on main, duplicating the legacy Telegram row. The fixed reader returns exactly four rows in order. Independent Codex review found no actionable P0–P2 findings.
The final branch includes the landed QA and tooling fixes. Remote Linux validation passed all 226 tests with zero failures or cancellations, followed by
npm run check(data validation and unchanged README generation). The final rebased diff also passed independent P0–P2 review.Exact-head Scripts, Actionlint, and CodeQL checks are green at
f004d28de2b54289a590bab076eb3801beac30a1: https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw-rtt/actions/runs/35836983718