Starting with v18.1, we have introduced checks for type and member info existence at the core level. If a type or member is not existent, the exception will be thrown by default:
NOTE: Type and member info is mandatory as ALL standard and third-party modules rely on it. We do NOT recommend disabling this check in production, because your application will still fail later (you may not notice it and it will happen on an end-user machine).
Typical but not all scenarios where you may see this error are:
- Code changes to an underlying object type structure. For instance, class renaming or removing, namespace or assembly changing; member renaming, removing or its underlying type changing (also applied to custom fields added at runtime).
- Invalid model differences for changed types and members are still present (e.g., for ListView columns and a DetailView layout, appearance and validation rules).
Please refer to this Support Center article for more details on possible solutions and ways to disable this behavior.
NOTE: Type and member info is mandatory as ALL standard and third-party modules rely on it. We do NOT recommend disabling this check in production, because your application will still fail later (you may not notice it and it will happen on an end-user machine).
Typical but not all scenarios where you may see this error are:
- Code changes to an underlying object type structure. For instance, class renaming or removing, namespace or assembly changing; member renaming, removing or its underlying type changing (also applied to custom fields added at runtime).
- Invalid model differences for changed types and members are still present (e.g., for ListView columns and a DetailView layout, appearance and validation rules).
Please refer to this Support Center article for more details on possible solutions and ways to disable this behavior.
Could the message not be more focused Dennis ? Like telling you specifically where in the Application Model structure the reference exists. Also a CRLF before the "To suppress" sentence would make the error more digestible.
ReplyDeleteWould Update Model return these as Unusable Nodes ?
Something which I've always thought would be useful is a 'remove unusable nodes' tool. We have too many to deal with manually.