Deleting a view does not empty it's object cache [#2031519]

Steps to reproduce:

On the Views list page, click the Add new view button
Configure a basic view
Click the Save & edit button
Make a change but don't save the view
Go back to the Views list page
Delete the view created above
Click the Add new view button
Create a new, different view (like a block instead of a page, or using a different display format) with the same name (actually, with the same machine name)
Click the Save & edit button
You'll be looking at the first view that was deleted

I suspect the initial view is still saved in the object cache and then that is what is being displayed when creating the second view.

Comment	File	Size	Author
#4	2031519-tests-only.patch	1.05 KB	damiankloip
#4
#4	2031519.patch	1.92 KB	damiankloip
#4

Support from Acquia helps fund testing for Drupal Acquia logo

Comments

Comment #1

pplantinga CreditAttribution: pplantinga commented 2 July 2013 at 02:30

Just tried this and got the expected error:

The machine-readable name is already in use. It must be unique.

Comment #2

oadaeh CreditAttribution: oadaeh commented 2 July 2013 at 03:30

You didn't perform step #6.

Comment #3

pplantinga CreditAttribution: pplantinga commented 2 July 2013 at 04:00

Ah. So I didn't. You're definitely right about this one.

Comment #4

damiankloip CreditAttribution: damiankloip commented 2 July 2013 at 07:23

Status:

Active

» Needs review

File	Size
2031519.patch	1.92 KB

2031519-tests-only.patch	1.05 KB

Yep, this is definitely a problem. Should be pretty easy to fix, we don't inject stuff from the container for configuration entities so I think we have to do something like this. Here is failing test and with fix.

Comment #5

dawehner

German

CreditAttribution: dawehner commented 2 July 2013 at 07:50

Status:

Needs review

» Reviewed & tested by the community

Perfect

Comment #6

oadaeh CreditAttribution: oadaeh commented 2 July 2013 at 12:17

Yes, the patch does correct the problem.

Comment #7

Dries CreditAttribution: Dries commented 2 July 2013 at 18:23

Status:

Reviewed & tested by the community

» Fixed

Committed to 8.x. Thanks.

Comment #8

effulgentsia CreditAttribution: effulgentsia commented 2 July 2013 at 18:30

I just noticed in #1901100: Make Edit module work with TempStore, so revisions are not saved on all atomic field edits that in that issue, the 'edit' collection indexes by uuid() rather than id(). Would it make sense to switch Views to do that as well?

Comment #9

damiankloip CreditAttribution: damiankloip commented 9 July 2013 at 12:19

We could, I would be happy either way. The main reason not to is that we upcast the tempstore data in the views UI with a param converter, which obviously uses the view name from the path to do its thing. So on that basis I would say maybe its better how it is? not sure.