You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Infinite Queries: wrong auto refetching with manual pageParams #4464
you now have projects 0-9 and 50-54 on screen. The stored pageParams are: [0, 5, 50]
trigger an automatic refetch by re-focussing the window
--> you now have projects 0-14 on screen pageParmas are: [0, 5, 10]
Expected behavior
data on screen should not change / stay as it was initially fetched, and pageParams shouldn't change.
How often does this bug happen?
Every time
Screenshots or Videos
No response
Platform
all
react-query version
4
TypeScript version
No response
Additional context
The problem seems to be that during an automatic refetch, getNextParam is always invoked when it exists. We have no knowledge of the fact that the 3rd page was fetched with the "manual" approach.
It seems that mixing both approaches is not supported at all, even though there is an extra section in the docs that does exactly that:
But that function will always be present, even when a single page fetch was "overwritten" with a manual fetch.
One way to fix this would be to extend pageParams (or the whole infinite query data structure) by the information if the fetch happened initially as manual or not.
Actually, we only store pageParams for refetches when everything is using the manual approach. Put another way: We never access pageParams if a getNextPageParam function is present.
One way to fix this would be to extend pageParams (or the whole infinite query data structure) by the information if the fetch happened initially as manual or not.
@TkDodo Wouldn't that be a breaking change because pageParams is stored as an array right now
One question is: Why even store pageParams if we didn't fetch manually? I think we could also just store pageParams IF we fetched manually and use undefined for other cases, so in the above example:
if we encounter undefined, we would just invoke getNextPageParam (except for the first page, which always needs undefined passed), and if we have a stored value, we would use that.
Just tried this approach out and it doesn't work if you use bi-directional queries. Like, fetch first page, then fetchNext, then fetchPrevious. You would have 3 pages and all of them would have pageParam: undefined. The refetch then starts at the first entry in the array, which is the "previous page", so we'd need that value's pageParam from the fetch as well.
So my statement that we "only use the stored pageParams when we did manual fetching" was wrong ...
This seems to be pretty hard to fix conceptually 😅
@TkDodo Okay then how about we go with your initial idea of using an array of objects, with the manual key and keep the pageParams as well for backwards compatibility. Something like this:
Internally we use the pageParamsWithManual (can be named something better) and rely on the manual key when refetching. With v5 deprecate the array format and use the new format for pageParams. This should do it right?
Activity
prateek3255 commentedon Nov 6, 2022
@TkDodo Wouldn't that be a breaking change because
pageParamsis stored as an array right nowTkDodo commentedon Nov 6, 2022
yes, could be something for v5. Or, we extend the structure to be like:
but this seems overly verbose and unnecessary.
One question is: Why even store
pageParamsif we didn't fetch manually? I think we could also just storepageParamsIF we fetched manually and useundefinedfor other cases, so in the above example:if we encounter
undefined, we would just invokegetNextPageParam(except for the first page, which always needsundefinedpassed), and if we have a stored value, we would use that.TkDodo commentedon Nov 6, 2022
Just tried this approach out and it doesn't work if you use bi-directional queries. Like, fetch first page, then fetchNext, then fetchPrevious. You would have 3 pages and all of them would have
pageParam: undefined. The refetch then starts at the first entry in the array, which is the "previous page", so we'd need that value'spageParamfrom the fetch as well.So my statement that we "only use the stored
pageParamswhen we did manual fetching" was wrong ...This seems to be pretty hard to fix conceptually 😅
prateek3255 commentedon Nov 6, 2022
@TkDodo Okay then how about we go with your initial idea of using an array of objects, with the
manualkey and keep thepageParamsas well for backwards compatibility. Something like this:Internally we use the
pageParamsWithManual(can be named something better) and rely on themanualkey when refetching. With v5 deprecate the array format and use the new format forpageParams. This should do it right?TkDodo commentedon Nov 6, 2022
I think even extending the object with another entry could break something, for example, if you implemented optimistic updates without spreading:
this is legit code in v4, as it returns an object with
pagesandpageParams, but it would take awaypageParamsWithManual.I think we should wait with this change for v5 and do your proposed change there.
prateek3255 commentedon Jan 22, 2023
Hey @TkDodo Since we have started working on v5 can I take up this issue and fix it for v5?
TkDodo commentedon Jan 22, 2023
I'll write up a dedicated RFC for infinite queries in v5 soon. It will impact this issue so let's please hold off for now
TkDodo commentedon Feb 20, 2023
PR: