IssueTracker

Project: platform/frameworks/support
Branch: androidx-master-dev

commit b90079595f33f58fece04026a97faa0d243acdb1
Author: Yuichi Araki <yaraki@google.com>
Date:   Wed Sep 18 16:55:49 2019

    Change the way to detect mismatch between POJO and query
   
    This fixes cursor mismatch warnings with expandProjection.
   
    Bug: 140759491
    Test: QueryMethodProcessorTest
    Change-Id: I7659002e5e0d1ef60fc1af2a625c0c36da0664d8

M       room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/processor/QueryMethodProcessor.kt
M       room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/solver/TypeAdapterStore.kt
M       room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/solver/query/result/PojoRowAdapter.kt
M       room/compiler/src/test/kotlin/androidx/room/processor/QueryMethodProcessorTest.kt
M       room/compiler/src/test/kotlin/androidx/room/testing/TestProcessor.kt

https://android-review.googlesource.com/1123258
https://goto.google.com/android-sha1/b90079595f33f58fece04026a97faa0d243acdb1

  The following changes were cherrypicked through Coastguard (https://android-build.googleplex.com/coastguard/)
  Release Track: (https://android-build.googleplex.com/coastguard/dashboard/6093116828680192/#/cherrypickHistory/all)
  Created: 2019-10-14 17:23:42.610596+00:00
  Changes: aosp/1123258
 

Project: platform/frameworks/support
Branch: androidx-master-dev

commit bdde5a1a970ddc9007b28de4aa29d60ffa588f08
Author: Yigit Boyar <yboyar@google.com>
Date:   Thu Apr 16 16:47:05 2020

    Re-factor how errors are dismissed when query is re-written
   
    This CL changes how we handle errors/warnings if query is
    re-written.
    There was a bug in expandProjection where we would report warnings
    for things that Room already fixes automatically (b/140759491).
    The solution to that problem (I7659002e5e0d1ef60fc1af2a625c0c36da0664d8)
    solved it by deferring validating of columns until after re-write
    decision is made. Unfortunately, this required changing PojoRowAdapter
    to have a dummy mapping until it is validating, make it hard to use
    as it does have a non-null mapping which is not useful.
   
    This CL partially reverts that change and instead rely on the log
    deferring logic we have in Context. This way, we don't need to break
    the stability of PojoRowAdapter while still having the ability to
    drop warnings that room fixes. This will also play nicer when we
    have different query re-writing options that can use more information
    about the query results.
   
    Bug: 153387066
    Bug: 140759491
    Test: existing tests pass
    Change-Id: I2ec967c763d33d7a3ff02c1a13c6953b460d1e5f

M       room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/log/RLog.kt
M       room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/processor/QueryMethodProcessor.kt
M       room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/solver/TypeAdapterStore.kt
M       room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/solver/query/result/PojoRowAdapter.kt

https://android-review.googlesource.com/1288456

Seeing the same issue here with '.setTransition(FragmentTransaction.TRANSIT_FRAGMENT_FADE)' on Google Pixel 8.1.0. Attached a video comparing before and after.

My current workaround is to use a different transition such as TRANSIT_FRAGMENT_OPEN. It looks similar enough for me.

I also confirm this. Helps only return on 27.0.2

I can confirm this bug. Reverting to 27.0.2 helped.

same here. reverte is the only workaround atm

I have the same issue. I had enter animation as fade_in and exit animation as fade_out. For me temporary solution is change exit animation to 0, transaction now looks almost the same as with fade_out exit animation

Thank you for reporting this bug. I am able to reproduce it. It was caused when fixing another bug and this error wasn't caught during testing.

Same issue. I had to roll back version to fix it

Fix has been submitted and should be in the next public release.

This bug has been fixed in  Support Library 27.1.1.

In the app that I am working on, this issue only occurs when pressing back (unwinding the transaction). The problem is still reproducible in 27.1.1. Does 27.1.1 fix the problem for others?