error calling function “findRecord” count: aggregate found duplicate table with key
I’m attempting to migrate to 2.7.5 OSS influx from cloud. While investigating a migration task failure I attempted a raw export:
from(bucket: "xyz_updates")
|> range(start: -3h, stop: now())
And thought this would produce a csv with headers written only once, as it did for another bucket in that Influx Cloud instance. But the following headers are repeated for each data line:
#group,false,false,true,true,....true,true,true,true,true,true,true
#datatype,string,long,dateTime:RFC3339,dateTime:RFC3339,dateTime:RFC3339,unsignedLong,string,string,...
#default,_result,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,result,table,_start,_stop,_time,_value,_field,_measurement,tags...
Background: Tried setting up a migration task for this bucket based on Migrate data from InfluxDB Cloud to InfluxDB OSS | InfluxDB OSS v2 Documentation (since there isn’t a migration guide for cloud v3 to OSS (v2) so I’m just following above), and got the following task error logs:
2024-02-16 12:20:57
error exhausting result iterator: error calling function "metadata" @99:1-99:11: error calling function "findRecord" @69:32-69:69: runtime error @61:12-61:19: count: aggregate found duplicate table with key: {_field=thatField,_measurement=thatMeasurement,_start=2024-02-13T00:00:00.000000000Z,_stop=2024-02-13T01:00:00.000000000Z,...}
I’m not sure how to go about solving for this situation. I’ve read about schema restrictions that point towards “Do not use duplicate names for tags and fields” but in that case the write itself fails. In my case, there’s a “duplicate table with some key”. How is that possible within a measurement if fields and tags are represented as columns and I have a unique measurement name? Would be great if you could point out a root cause for me to investigate here or just clarify my understanding of this situation!
PS: Hi @pauldix ! If this error can be dealt with via an OSS v3 release (which I hear is just around the corner), I can see that you’ve already replied to InfluxDB 3.0 release timeline - #8 by austinredacted But could we do something about this error or do we just have to wait? Thanks!