{{ message }}
fix: Erro ao enviar mensagem para grupos (remoteJid failed constraint)#2162
Merged
DavidsonGomes merged 3 commits intoEvolutionAPI:developfrom Nov 7, 2025
Conversation
…B writes Refactors the cache-saving logic to prevent `Unique constraint failed` errors. This issue occurs when an item's `remoteJid` is not yet included in the `jidOptions` of the existing record. The database query now uses an `OR` condition to find a matching record by either `jidOptions` (using `contains`) or by the `remoteJid` itself in a single query. Additionally, this commit introduces several performance optimizations: 1. **Skip Unnecessary Updates**: The function now performs a deep comparison between the new payload and the `existingRecord`. An `update` operation is only executed if the data has actually changed, reducing unnecessary database writes. 2. **Parallel Processing**: The sequential `for...of` loop has been replaced with `Promise.allSettled`. This allows all items in the `data` array to be processed concurrently, significantly speeding up execution for batch inputs. 3. **Data Consistency**: The JIDs in `jidOptions` are now sorted alphabetically before being joined into a string. This ensures that the change-detection logic is accurate, regardless of the order in which JIDs were discovered. 4. **Refactor**: Simplified JID unification logic using a `Set` and introduced a `normalizeJid` helper function for cleaner code. TODO: Investigate the root cause of why `remoteJid` is sometimes not present in `jidOptions` upon initial discovery.
Contributor
moothz
changed the title
![sourcery-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/48477?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey there - I've reviewed your changes - here's some feedback:
- Consider limiting the concurrency in Promise.allSettled (e.g. via a p-limit or batching) for large data arrays to prevent overwhelming your database connections.
- Using Prisma’s contains on the comma-separated jidOptions string may produce false positives; for more reliable lookups consider storing jidOptions as an array field or using an exact-match filter.
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:
## Overall Comments
- Consider limiting the concurrency in Promise.allSettled (e.g. via a p-limit or batching) for large data arrays to prevent overwhelming your database connections.
- Using Prisma’s contains on the comma-separated jidOptions string may produce false positives; for more reliable lookups consider storing jidOptions as an array field or using an exact-match filter.
## Individual Comments
### Comment 1
<location> `src/utils/onWhatsappCache.ts:99-108` </location>
<code_context>
+ // 2. Unifica todos os JIDs usando um Set para garantir valores únicos
+ const finalJidOptions = new Set(expandedJids);
- if (existingRecord?.jidOptions) {
- const existingJids = existingRecord.jidOptions.split(',');
- // TODO: Adicionar JIDs existentes que não estão na lista atual
- existingJids.forEach((jid) => {
- if (!finalJidOptions.includes(jid)) {
- finalJidOptions.push(jid);
- }
- });
+ if (lidAltJid) {
+ finalJidOptions.add(lidAltJid);
}
-
- // TODO: Se tiver remoteJidAlt com @lid novo, adicionar
- if (altJid && !finalJidOptions.includes(altJid)) {
- finalJidOptions.push(altJid);
+
+ if (existingRecord?.jidOptions) {
+ existingRecord.jidOptions.split(',').forEach(jid => finalJidOptions.add(jid));
}
</code_context>
<issue_to_address>
**suggestion (bug_risk):** Merging existing JIDs may introduce legacy or malformed entries.
Validate each JID's format before adding to finalJidOptions to prevent legacy or malformed entries from being included.
Suggested implementation:
```typescript
// 2. Unifica todos os JIDs usando um Set para garantir valores únicos e válidos
function isValidJid(jid: string | null | undefined): boolean {
// Exemplo de validação: JID deve conter '@' e não ser vazio
return typeof jid === 'string' && jid.includes('@') && jid.trim().length > 0;
}
const finalJidOptions = new Set(
expandedJids.filter(jid => isValidJid(jid))
);
```
```typescript
if (lidAltJid && isValidJid(lidAltJid)) {
finalJidOptions.add(lidAltJid);
}
```
```typescript
if (existingRecord?.jidOptions) {
existingRecord.jidOptions
.split(',')
.filter(jid => isValidJid(jid))
.forEach(jid => finalJidOptions.add(jid));
}
```
</issue_to_address>Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
This was referenced Nov 25, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
📋 Description
O objetivo principal destas modificações é corrigir o problema das mensagens não serem enviadas para alguns grupos, principalmente os que tem o número do criador no jid (ex.: '559911223345-1234567890@g.us').
A interrupção no fluxo do request é causada por um erro ao tentar criar um novo registro na base de dados com um remoteJid já existente, isto acontece pois os registros são buscados utilizando apenas o jidOptions, que às vezes não tem o atual remoteJid na lista.
O erro em questão:
Os dados diretamente na base de dados, mostrando que o remoteJid não estava no jidOptions:
A lógica de busca foi alterada para prevenir erros de 'Unique constraint failed'.
Para corrigir isso, a busca no banco agora usa
ORpara verificar tanto pelojidOptionsquanto peloremoteJidem uma única query.Além dessa correção, outras otimizações foram implementadas:
updatesó é executado se houver de fato uma mudança, reduzindo escritas desnecessárias no banco.for...of) foi substituída porPromise.allSettled, permitindo que todos os itens do arraydatasejam processados em paralelo.jidOptionsagora são ordenados antes de serem salvos ou comparados. Isso garante que a verificação de "mudança" seja precisa, independentemente da ordem de inserção.Sete um helpernormalizeJidfoi criado para limpar o código. O código foi envolto em um try-catch para evitar interrupção do fluxo de envio de mensagens, visto que o cache não é crítico.🧪 Type of Change
🧪 Testing
✅ Checklist
📝 Additional Notes
TODO: Investigar a causa raiz de o remoteJid às vezes não estar no jidOptions no momento da busca inicial. Também notei na base de dados que alguns números estão vindo com o "@g.us" duplicado.
Summary by Sourcery
Fix cache save errors for WhatsApp group messages and optimize saveOnWhatsappCache
Bug Fixes:
Enhancements:
Chores: