Home › Forums › implementation › Implementation discussion ›

Reference resolves to > 1 objects OPEN LOADER ERRORS

Submitted by Guest on Fri, 01/03/2013 - 10:19
in 
 2013/03/01 09:11:42 - Add Classes 3.0 - Failed to process row C_1H: Invalid reference: <lookup.productGroup>CLASS_62. Reference resolves to > 1 objects

So the above error is occuring when I attempt to process the lookup and loader row below.

I have loaded ethe Products fine.  I have loaded the classifications and checked the etl_log to ensure the CLASS_62 etc values exist and that there is only 1 reference for them...any other debug tips?

 

Field name    Map to    Exclude null    Value    Remove default objects

ClassID    $PRODID<product.service>classifications[0]    Y    <lookup.productGroup>$value    Y

‹ How to access customer account type in reminder letter? Reminder send logic ›

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Re: Reference resolves to > 1 objects OPEN LOADER ERRORS

Submitted by tanderson on Fri, 01/03/2013 - 11:29.

It means that you have more than one lookup.productGroup in the lookups table with code CLASS_62.

The loader doesn't know which one to use, so it rejects the row.

-Tim

Re: Reference resolves to > 1 objects OPEN LOADER ERRORS

Submitted by bencharlton (not verified) on Fri, 01/03/2013 - 11:53.

Or does it....

CLASS_62 was the LoaderID (from the Kettle transform which loaded the classes) for the etl table which then references the lookup table I assume... I checked the ETL_LOG table for double ups ...using CLASS_62 ref there where none.

when I modified the loader to use code=$value and changed the value to be the actual lookup codes it processed without error.

Re: Reference resolves to > 1 objects OPEN LOADER ERRORS

Submitted by tanderson on Tue, 05/03/2013 - 13:41.

Odd. I would only expect that error message to appear if:

 select * from etl_log where row_id = "CLASS_62" and archetype="lookup.productGroup"

returns more than one row.

Your workaround is fine though.

-Tim

Syndicate content