Unattained type change revert and loss of data

Hey, we've experienced a super frustrating issue on July 7th and trying to understand the cause.

We have a Page Type called "Video". There we've had a field called "Verse" of type Number.

Here's what happened

  1. On July 7th around 08:30am EST we changed the field type from Number to Key Text
  2. We saved the change and verified in the content editor that it was text and not number
  3. We started entering text in the new field and saved all changes
  4. Later that day the field somehow changed back to number as it was reverted

As a result we lost all of our work and data. This seriously eroded the trust in the system because there are no logs or explanation as to why this happened.

It's a frustrating experience and loss of productivity.

Would you help me understand what happened?

What changed the field to number again?

Why we lost the data we've entered in this field?

Would it happen again and what is the guarantee for us that we are not going to lose more data?

Thank you!

Hello @stoyan.merdzhanov, welcome to the community forum!

What happened in your repository was unexpected, we aren’t currently tracking any similar issue.

What should normally happen if you want to free the name of a field to use it in a different one is: you delete the previous field (knowing that all the existing fields in published documents will be lost) and create a new one with the same name. This process is not reversed unless someone does it manually.

  • Is there a possibility that you have in some other custom type a field of type number with the same Verse API ID?
  • Can you send me the URL of your repository in a private message?

We will be attentive to this matter, sorry for the inconvenience that this caused to you and your team

Hey Paulina, thanks for the tips.

I have followed exactly the same process as the one you described.

  1. Delete the old field and save
  2. Create a new field with the same API ID and save

The field was successfully saved and we’ve actually used it.

I originally thought that we didn’t save the type change. But I verified the type has been changed in a document.

Then I double-checked and our admins have already added data into the new field.

All of a sudden some hours later the field turned again into the previous version and deleted everything we’ve had.

Sending you the repo.

Thanks.

Hey Paulina,

It’s been over a week since the last update. And I haven’t heard back from you after sending the details in a private message.

Is there any update on this?

We are quite concerned that our work and efforts may get lost again which would be totally horrible experience with the product.

And by the way we have upgraded to a quite high plan so I expect that we can get a movement on this?

Hello Stoyan, sorry for the long wait, due to a large number of request we weren’t able to sort this earlier. Your issue is now top priority and will be handled asap.

I also answered to you on a private message.

Thank you

Hey Paulina, thank you for the update!

Hope we will sort this out.

We should be able at least to get some insights from any logging system you may have.

This should tell us what happened.

Thanks!

Hey, I hope you’re having a great day.

I’ve made the team aware of your case. I’ll get news for you as soon as we figure this out.

Thank you for your comprehension and if you need help with anything else don’t hesitate to reach us again.

Thank you for sharing your case with us.

In this case, the reason why this happened is most certainly because someone in your team manually modified the Custom type and the document. These kinds of modifications can only be made by administrators. If your repository has more than one administrator, it is likely that anyone can make changes of this type.

This article explains in detail what happens when a Custom type is modified.

It is true that at the moment there is no history feature to verify who modified something within the Custom types. A similar functionality: History revisions only exists within the documents.

I’m going to tag the @features-team to make them aware of this and to consider it for future improvements.

If there’s anything else we can help you with, let us know.

This is being tracked as an open feature request.

If you have another use-case for this feature, you can 'Flag' this topic to reopen. Please use the :heart: button to show your support for the feature and check out our Feature Request Guidelines.