[18.0][FIX] account_financial_report: fix for "group_id" is not searchable accessing account_ids #1327

micheledic · 2025-06-03T08:46:08Z

Before this PR

The group_id is not stored so it appear "group_id" is not searchable accessing account_ids

Fixes #1306

micheledic · 2025-06-03T13:22:58Z

@OCA/accounting-maintainers

micheledic · 2025-06-17T07:52:58Z

@OCA/accounting-maintainers ping

micheledic · 2025-06-23T10:52:20Z

@OCA/accounting-maintainers ping

monen17

Thanks for the PR!
Please shorten the commit title because it is cut with ellipsis:

See https://github.com/OCA/odoo-community.org/blob/master/website/Contribution/CONTRIBUTING.rst#71commit-message:

please check if the commit message is cut with ellipsis.

This should be enough:

[FIX] account_financial_report: group_id is not searchable

any other detail can go in the commit description

As I said in #1306 (comment) the issue isn't very clear to me so I can't check if this PR is fixing it.
Only did the code review and there are some points that need clarification.

monen17 · 2025-07-04T14:04:15Z

account_financial_report/models/account.py

+
+    def write(self, vals):
+        res = super().write(vals)
+        self.env["account.group"].invalidate_model(["account_ids"])


Could you please explain why this is needed?

This is done every time any field of an account is updated: is it really necessary to invalidate the cache if an account changes its name? Or it becomes reconcilable?

Maybe we should invalidate the cache only when code is modified, could you please check if that's enough?

monen17 · 2025-07-04T14:04:28Z

account_financial_report/models/account.py

+    @api.model_create_multi
+    def create(self, vals_list):
+        res = super().create(vals_list)
+        self.env["account.group"].invalidate_model(["account_ids"])


Could you please explain why this is needed?

The account_ids is now computed so the depends on

account-financial-reporting/account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

Line 60 in 1ffec3d

"account_ids",

will never be called.
I have not found another way to make the compute work , any idea?

The field account.group.account_ids should be computed on the fly every time it is needed, so I think there is no need for this cache invalidation, could you please check?

Moreover, this is done every time any field of an account is updated: is it really necessary to invalidate the cache if an account changes its name? Or it becomes reconcilable?

I have tried without invalidate but the test are failing because account_ids does not contain the account_id created. May. I guess that the reason is that if on the same transaction you create an account and than retrieve the data with a SQL query, the data of the account created is not flushed yet so it is not retrieven from the sql

Thanks for checking!
Then we have indeed to invalidate the cache when a new account is created.

I rewrited the compute now it is not needed to invalidate the model

monen17 · 2025-07-04T14:09:24Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

-                group.complete_name = group.name
+    @api.depends_context("company")
+    def _compute_account_ids(self):
+        """Retrieves every account from `self` and `self`'s subgroups.


The field account_ids used to only contain the accounts of group self; the accounts of the subgroups are added in field compute_account_ids.

Please only retrieve the accounts of group self so the existing behavior is preserved.

Hello,
on _compute_account_ids i build a SQL query that is the reverse of the compute of the group
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/07626050bd0104fecd8799b56d30245d00da3f27/addons/account/models/account_account.py#L471

To compute the child of a specific group, on the 18.0 it will search for group where the code of the account is contained between prefix_start and prefix_end . I build the reverse SQL query of the compute.

The query is build so if the compute is triggered on more than 1 record, the query is done once but it will compute all the group in self

Ok so you are not actually computing the accounts of

self's subgroups.

if that's the case, please remove this part of the docstring because it's misleading.

monen17 · 2025-07-04T14:11:11Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

    )

-    @api.depends("name", "parent_id.complete_name")
-    def _compute_complete_name(self):


Why has this been removed? How are we computing the complete_name now?

my fault, i restore the compute

👍 Thanks

monen17 · 2025-07-04T14:14:52Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

+ON agroup.code_prefix_start <= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>%(root_company_id)s,
+char_length(agroup.code_prefix_start))
+AND agroup.code_prefix_end >= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>%(root_company_id)s,
+char_length(agroup.code_prefix_end))


Could you please clarify what is the self.env.company.root_id.id doing in a filter on account group prefixes?

it is used on odoo 18.0 compute https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/18.0/addons/account/models/account_account.py#L471
I build the query so it will retrieve the information consistent with the account group compute .
I guess it is used because if a company is a branch, it will be retrieved the information only of the data from the json field "code" for the root company

The linked query is

SELECT DISTINCT ON (account_code.code) account_code.code, agroup.id AS group_id FROM (VALUES %(account_code_values)s) AS account_code (code) LEFT JOIN account_group agroup ON agroup.code_prefix_start <= LEFT(account_code.code, char_length(agroup.code_prefix_start)) AND agroup.code_prefix_end >= LEFT(account_code.code, char_length(agroup.code_prefix_end)) AND agroup.company_id = %(root_company_id)s ORDER BY account_code.code, char_length(agroup.code_prefix_start) DESC, agroup.id

(from https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9f8c364f056c8937409f8ed91b8d1fa436c2d7c0/addons/account/models/account_account.py#L473-L481)

In the linked query, the root_company_id is only used in the last condition

AND agroup.company_id = %(root_company_id)s

but in this PR's query root_company_id is used in combination with code_prefix_start and code_store:

ON agroup.code_prefix_start <= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>%(root_company_id)s,
char_length(agroup.code_prefix_start))
AND agroup.code_prefix_end >= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>%(root_company_id)s,
char_length(agroup.code_prefix_end))

could you please clarify why?

Moreover, I can't see any code_store in the linked query, how is it in this PR's query if this PR's query is just the opposite of the linked query?

The code_store is a JSON field within account.account. To access the code for a specific company, we have to use field_name->>index. For example, to get the code for company ID 1, you'd use code_store->>1. In the account_account compute query, you already have the code needed to determine the group, so there's no need to retrieve data from the code_store JSON.
In my case you are computing the account of a specific group , but you have to retrieve the data from the query. The fastest way is a single query with the comparison directly in SQL getting the data from the json field

Thanks for the explanation!
I was missing that accounts are multi-company in 18.0, then code is computed and code_store stores the account code for each account in the different companies.
I'm not 100% convinced of this query and would have preferred using the ORM but looks like it's working fine so it's ok 👍

It is better using a query because if we have to do it by ORM, it will be slowly becuase it will not use all the index.
However now i rewritten the query, before it was bugged.
Does not have any sense to pass the company in the environment because every group is linked to a company so i will do a single query that get the correct account_ids for the company we are on .

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

monen17 · 2025-07-07T17:08:16Z

account_financial_report/models/account.py

+    @api.model_create_multi
+    def create(self, vals_list):
+        res = super().create(vals_list)
+        self.env["account.group"].invalidate_model(["account_ids"])


The field account.group.account_ids should be computed on the fly every time it is needed, so I think there is no need for this cache invalidation, could you please check?

Moreover, this is done every time any field of an account is updated: is it really necessary to invalidate the cache if an account changes its name? Or it becomes reconcilable?

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

monen17 · 2025-07-07T17:18:03Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

-                group.complete_name = group.name
+    @api.depends_context("company")
+    def _compute_account_ids(self):
+        """Retrieves every account from `self` and `self`'s subgroups.


Ok so you are not actually computing the accounts of

self's subgroups.

if that's the case, please remove this part of the docstring because it's misleading.

monen17 · 2025-07-07T17:21:25Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

+ON agroup.code_prefix_start <= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>%(root_company_id)s,
+char_length(agroup.code_prefix_start))
+AND agroup.code_prefix_end >= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>%(root_company_id)s,
+char_length(agroup.code_prefix_end))


The linked query is

SELECT DISTINCT ON (account_code.code) account_code.code, agroup.id AS group_id FROM (VALUES %(account_code_values)s) AS account_code (code) LEFT JOIN account_group agroup ON agroup.code_prefix_start <= LEFT(account_code.code, char_length(agroup.code_prefix_start)) AND agroup.code_prefix_end >= LEFT(account_code.code, char_length(agroup.code_prefix_end)) AND agroup.company_id = %(root_company_id)s ORDER BY account_code.code, char_length(agroup.code_prefix_start) DESC, agroup.id

(from https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9f8c364f056c8937409f8ed91b8d1fa436c2d7c0/addons/account/models/account_account.py#L473-L481)

In the linked query, the root_company_id is only used in the last condition

AND agroup.company_id = %(root_company_id)s

but in this PR's query root_company_id is used in combination with code_prefix_start and code_store:

ON agroup.code_prefix_start <= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>%(root_company_id)s,
char_length(agroup.code_prefix_start))
AND agroup.code_prefix_end >= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>%(root_company_id)s,
char_length(agroup.code_prefix_end))

could you please clarify why?

Moreover, I can't see any code_store in the linked query, how is it in this PR's query if this PR's query is just the opposite of the linked query?

monen17 · 2025-07-07T17:23:21Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

    )

-    @api.depends("name", "parent_id.complete_name")
-    def _compute_complete_name(self):


👍 Thanks

micheledic

fatto

monen17 · 2025-07-11T12:44:49Z

account_financial_report/models/account.py

+    @api.model_create_multi
+    def create(self, vals_list):
+        res = super().create(vals_list)
+        self.env["account.group"].invalidate_model(["account_ids"])


Thanks for checking!
Then we have indeed to invalidate the cache when a new account is created.

monen17 · 2025-07-11T12:45:49Z

account_financial_report/models/account.py

+
+    def write(self, vals):
+        res = super().write(vals)
+        self.env["account.group"].invalidate_model(["account_ids"])


This is done every time any field of an account is updated: is it really necessary to invalidate the cache if an account changes its name? Or it becomes reconcilable?

Maybe we should invalidate the cache only when code is modified, could you please check if that's enough?

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

monen17 · 2025-07-11T12:55:41Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

+ON agroup.code_prefix_start <= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>%(root_company_id)s,
+char_length(agroup.code_prefix_start))
+AND agroup.code_prefix_end >= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>%(root_company_id)s,
+char_length(agroup.code_prefix_end))


Thanks for the explanation!
I was missing that accounts are multi-company in 18.0, then code is computed and code_store stores the account code for each account in the different companies.
I'm not 100% convinced of this query and would have preferred using the ORM but looks like it's working fine so it's ok 👍

monen17 · 2025-07-11T13:18:14Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

+            return
+        for record in self:
+            record.account_ids = list(
+                map(int, group_by_code.get(record.id, "").split(", "))


Trying this in runboat results in an error for the following use-case:

Create a group

Create a new company

Open the group

Select both companies (the original company is still the active one)

Select the new company as active

Actual
This error is raised:

Trace

Traceback (most recent call last): File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 2123, in _transactioning return service_model.retrying(func, env=self.env) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/service/model.py", line 156, in retrying result = func() File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 2090, in _serve_ir_http response = self.dispatcher.dispatch(rule.endpoint, args) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 2338, in dispatch result = self.request.registry['ir.http']._dispatch(endpoint) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_http.py", line 333, in _dispatch result = endpoint(**request.params) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 754, in route_wrapper result = endpoint(self, *args, **params_ok) File "/opt/odoo/addons/web/controllers/dataset.py", line 36, in call_kw return call_kw(request.env[model], method, args, kwargs) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/api.py", line 533, in call_kw result = getattr(recs, name)(*args, **kwargs) File "/opt/odoo/addons/web/models/models.py", line 86, in web_read values_list: list[dict] = self.read(fields_to_read, load=None) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/models.py", line 3843, in read return self._read_format(fnames=fields, load=load) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/models.py", line 4074, in _read_format vals[name] = convert(record[name], record, use_display_name) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/models.py", line 7061, in __getitem__ return self._fields[key].__get__(self) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 4620, in __get__ return super().__get__(records, owner) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 3059, in __get__ return super().__get__(records, owner) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 1303, in __get__ self.compute_value(recs) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 1485, in compute_value records._compute_field_value(self) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/models.py", line 5280, in _compute_field_value fields.determine(field.compute, self) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 110, in determine return needle(*args) File "/mnt/data/odoo-addons-dir/account_financial_report/models/account_group.py", line 81, in _compute_account_ids map(int, group_by_code.get(record.id, "").split(", ")) AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'split'

Expected
no error

Here is the video of the error being raised:

Screencast.From.2025-07-11.15-15-03.mp4

fixed by rewrite of the query

Thanks!
I tried the same steps as above and no error is raised 👏
but as soon as I edit the code_prefix_end of the created group the following is raised:

Details

Traceback (most recent call last): File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 2123, in _transactioning return service_model.retrying(func, env=self.env) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/service/model.py", line 156, in retrying result = func() File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 2090, in _serve_ir_http response = self.dispatcher.dispatch(rule.endpoint, args) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 2338, in dispatch result = self.request.registry['ir.http']._dispatch(endpoint) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_http.py", line 333, in _dispatch result = endpoint(**request.params) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 754, in route_wrapper result = endpoint(self, *args, **params_ok) File "/opt/odoo/addons/web/controllers/dataset.py", line 36, in call_kw return call_kw(request.env[model], method, args, kwargs) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/api.py", line 533, in call_kw result = getattr(recs, name)(*args, **kwargs) File "/opt/odoo/addons/web/models/models.py", line 1012, in onchange todo = [ File "/opt/odoo/addons/web/models/models.py", line 1015, in if field_name not in done and snapshot0.has_changed(field_name) File "/opt/odoo/addons/web/models/models.py", line 1129, in has_changed return self[field_name].keys() != set(self.record[field_name]._ids) or any( File "/opt/odoo/odoo/models.py", line 7061, in __getitem__ return self._fields[key].__get__(self) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 4620, in __get__ return super().__get__(records, owner) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 3059, in __get__ return super().__get__(records, owner) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 1303, in __get__ self.compute_value(recs) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 1485, in compute_value records._compute_field_value(self) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/models.py", line 5280, in _compute_field_value fields.determine(field.compute, self) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 110, in determine return needle(*args) File "/mnt/data/odoo-addons-dir/account_financial_report/models/account_group.py", line 78, in _compute_account_ids record.account_ids = list( ValueError: invalid literal for int() with base 10: ''

Video is

Screencast.From.2025-07-18.17-56-36.mp4

monen17 · 2025-07-18T15:50:17Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

+            )
+        )
+        group_by_code = dict(results)
+        self.account_ids = self.env["account.account"]


Suggested change

self.account_ids = self.env["account.account"]

This is already assigned at the beginning of the method and hasn't changed since.

monen17 · 2025-07-18T15:58:16Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

+            return
+        for record in self:
+            record.account_ids = list(
+                map(int, group_by_code.get(record.id, "").split(", "))


Thanks!
I tried the same steps as above and no error is raised 👏
but as soon as I edit the code_prefix_end of the created group the following is raised:

Details

Traceback (most recent call last): File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 2123, in _transactioning return service_model.retrying(func, env=self.env) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/service/model.py", line 156, in retrying result = func() File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 2090, in _serve_ir_http response = self.dispatcher.dispatch(rule.endpoint, args) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 2338, in dispatch result = self.request.registry['ir.http']._dispatch(endpoint) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_http.py", line 333, in _dispatch result = endpoint(**request.params) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/http.py", line 754, in route_wrapper result = endpoint(self, *args, **params_ok) File "/opt/odoo/addons/web/controllers/dataset.py", line 36, in call_kw return call_kw(request.env[model], method, args, kwargs) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/api.py", line 533, in call_kw result = getattr(recs, name)(*args, **kwargs) File "/opt/odoo/addons/web/models/models.py", line 1012, in onchange todo = [ File "/opt/odoo/addons/web/models/models.py", line 1015, in if field_name not in done and snapshot0.has_changed(field_name) File "/opt/odoo/addons/web/models/models.py", line 1129, in has_changed return self[field_name].keys() != set(self.record[field_name]._ids) or any( File "/opt/odoo/odoo/models.py", line 7061, in __getitem__ return self._fields[key].__get__(self) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 4620, in __get__ return super().__get__(records, owner) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 3059, in __get__ return super().__get__(records, owner) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 1303, in __get__ self.compute_value(recs) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 1485, in compute_value records._compute_field_value(self) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/models.py", line 5280, in _compute_field_value fields.determine(field.compute, self) File "/opt/odoo/odoo/fields.py", line 110, in determine return needle(*args) File "/mnt/data/odoo-addons-dir/account_financial_report/models/account_group.py", line 78, in _compute_account_ids record.account_ids = list( ValueError: invalid literal for int() with base 10: ''

Video is

Screencast.From.2025-07-18.17-56-36.mp4

monen17 · 2025-07-18T16:00:19Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

+char_length(agroup.code_prefix_start))
+AND agroup.code_prefix_end >= LEFT(%(code_store)s->>agroup.company_id::text,
+char_length(agroup.code_prefix_end))
+AND agroup.id IN (%(group_ids)s)


Suggested change

AND agroup.id IN (%(group_ids)s)

WHERE agroup.id IN (%(group_ids)s)

I don't know if it changes the result of the query, but it seems reasonable for this to be a WHERE condition, let me know what you think.

micheledic · 2025-07-22T10:30:19Z

@OCA/accounting-maintainers ping

micheledic · 2025-07-31T10:39:00Z

@OCA/accounting-maintainers ping

micheledic · 2025-08-06T12:48:53Z

@OCA/accounting-maintainers ping

pedrobaeza · 2025-09-11T09:55:11Z

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

+        results = self.env.execute_query(
+            SQL(
+                """
+SELECT


Please don't use SQL and do it by ORM.

The query compares the same character length of the prefix length, it is not possible in Odoo ORM. because it means that we have to do a search with the WHOLE database of account and filter them in python.
It is very slowly than a query that uses indexes.
The prefix start and end may have different length so the logic is to compare the same length of character of the prefix and it is not possible with the search but only with filtered on the entire databse recordset

Uhm, I don't think the penalization is so high, as the number of accounts is limited (thousands at maximum). Anyway, at least put the query at the same indentation level that corresponds to Python code.

account_financial_report/models/account_group.py

pedrobaeza

OK, let's fix the problem

/ocabot merge patch

OCA-git-bot · 2025-09-11T10:14:17Z

What a great day to merge this nice PR. Let's do it!
Prepared branch 18.0-ocabot-merge-pr-1327-by-pedrobaeza-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

Signed-off-by pedrobaeza

pedrobaeza · 2025-09-11T10:14:27Z

Thanks for the patch

OCA-git-bot · 2025-09-11T10:17:23Z

@pedrobaeza your merge command was aborted due to failed check(s), which you can inspect on this commit of 18.0-ocabot-merge-pr-1327-by-pedrobaeza-bump-patch.

After fixing the problem, you can re-issue a merge command. Please refrain from merging manually as it will most probably make the target branch red.

It happens because on 18.0 the group_id is not stored so the one2many account_ids is not working

micheledic · 2025-09-11T10:20:29Z

@pedrobaeza fixed the pre-commit error, now you can retrigger the merge!

pedrobaeza · 2025-09-11T10:21:10Z

/ocabot merge patch

OCA-git-bot · 2025-09-11T10:21:18Z

What a great day to merge this nice PR. Let's do it!
Prepared branch 18.0-ocabot-merge-pr-1327-by-pedrobaeza-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

OCA-git-bot · 2025-09-11T10:24:33Z

Congratulations, your PR was merged at 51b2077. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️

This was referenced Jun 3, 2025

[18.0] account_financial_report: error non-stored field cannot be searched breaks odoo sh project update #1306

Closed

[18.0][MIG] l10n_it_financial_statements_report: Migration to 18.0 OCA/l10n-italy#4789

Open

micheledic force-pushed the 18.0_fix_account_ids_not_searchable branch 7 times, most recently from 286d79e to 7b4f8eb Compare June 3, 2025 12:49

monen17 suggested changes Jul 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

micheledic force-pushed the 18.0_fix_account_ids_not_searchable branch 2 times, most recently from 3ecce30 to 081e0e3 Compare July 7, 2025 08:29

monen17 suggested changes Jul 7, 2025

View reviewed changes

micheledic force-pushed the 18.0_fix_account_ids_not_searchable branch from 081e0e3 to 56413b7 Compare July 9, 2025 07:44

micheledic commented Jul 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

micheledic requested a review from monen17 July 9, 2025 08:43

monen17 suggested changes Jul 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

micheledic force-pushed the 18.0_fix_account_ids_not_searchable branch 3 times, most recently from 0311fad to 1f0094a Compare July 11, 2025 15:43

micheledic requested a review from monen17 July 11, 2025 15:51

monen17 suggested changes Jul 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

micheledic force-pushed the 18.0_fix_account_ids_not_searchable branch from 1f0094a to a3a9952 Compare July 21, 2025 07:23

micheledic requested a review from monen17 July 21, 2025 07:36

pedrobaeza changed the title ~~[FIX] account_financial_report: fix for "group_id" is not searchable accessing account_ids~~ [18.0][FIX] account_financial_report: fix for "group_id" is not searchable accessing account_ids Sep 11, 2025

pedrobaeza added this to the 18.0 milestone Sep 11, 2025

pedrobaeza requested changes Sep 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

micheledic force-pushed the 18.0_fix_account_ids_not_searchable branch 2 times, most recently from a26bacf to 7f9ad3e Compare September 11, 2025 10:13

pedrobaeza approved these changes Sep 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

OCA-git-bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2025

Merge PR #1327 into 18.0

33ed1e3

Signed-off-by pedrobaeza

OCA-git-bot added the bot is merging ⏳ label Sep 11, 2025

OCA-git-bot removed the bot is merging ⏳ label Sep 11, 2025

[FIX] account_financial_report: fix for "group_id" is not searchable

8535b91

It happens because on 18.0 the group_id is not stored so the one2many account_ids is not working

micheledic force-pushed the 18.0_fix_account_ids_not_searchable branch from 7f9ad3e to 8535b91 Compare September 11, 2025 10:19

OCA-git-bot added the bot is merging ⏳ label Sep 11, 2025

OCA-git-bot merged commit 074a2a2 into OCA:18.0 Sep 11, 2025
6 of 7 checks passed

OCA-git-bot added merged 🎉 and removed bot is merging ⏳ labels Sep 11, 2025

	AND agroup.id IN (%(group_ids)s)
	WHERE agroup.id IN (%(group_ids)s)

Uh oh!

[18.0][FIX] account_financial_report: fix for "group_id" is not searchable accessing account_ids #1327

[18.0][FIX] account_financial_report: fix for "group_id" is not searchable accessing account_ids #1327

Uh oh!

Conversation

micheledic commented Jun 3, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Before this PR

Uh oh!

micheledic commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

micheledic commented Jun 17, 2025

Uh oh!

micheledic commented Jun 23, 2025

Uh oh!

monen17 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

micheledic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

micheledic commented Jun 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading