Strange behavior on synchronization

I’m facing some issues that I can’t understand about data and syncronization.
Based on the value of ‘Prazo para a Tarefa’ (deadline), the next field should show the sprint that would correspond to that month (I know that I’m incorrectly using the sprint concept, sorry).

The value that was in that field, 10 minutes ago, was 25/10/2024. And I know that the synchronization with Airtable is not immediate based on my plan. But I’m not understanding why, in Noloco tables, the value continues to be 25/10/2024

If you want to go deeper, the record is 461 on Tarefas table in ACVV-Projetos Tarefas e Ações, and the form is

Hey @AcervoVivo, if you could please share the URL to this record to look into the problem.

Hi Carlos

Here is the URL of this record https://acervovivo.noloco.co/todo/tarefas/view/reccBBioR0hGtNgjH/tarefa?_parentPage=eyJlbmFibGVkIjpmYWxzZSwiZWxlbWVudElkIjoiaWdDbGhXOGQ1IiwicGFyYW1zIjp7Il9xIjoiYXJ0ZSBwZWxhIHBheiIsInN0YXR1cyI6bnVsbH19

But is happening in every filter that dependes of one Record chosen previously. It has become really anoying.
I thank you in advance to be working with this issue

Hi, I’ve maybe discovered the issue (I hope so)

I have 4 different apps running in the same Noloco workspace ( :crazy_face:). Each of them pulls information from a different AirTable database.

At a certain point (and in retrospect this is when the problem started) I decided to synchronize (via Airtable) the tables from two of these Airtable databases and let them also be synchronized at Noloco as I planned to link some of them via AirTable.

Today I removed these duplicate tables from Noloco and it started working again (allowing fields with filters to work again almost immediately).

If I ever link these tables, I will do so via Noloco.

Sorry for taking up your time with this, it took me a while to relate this change I’ve made to the tables with the problems that were gradually arising.

Have a good weekend and thank you again for your attention.

1 Like

Really glad you got to the bottom of this one @AcervoVivo and thanks for following up with an explanation

1 Like