Observation, not a regression — noticed while verifying #76 in the browser and deliberately kept out of that PR.
Measured
With #76's fix in place (business_unit now fetched), /_console/apps/ai.objectstack.duly/duly_task/view/by_unit on the #75 seed renders:
Business unit ▸ Northgate Operations 33
Business unit ▸ Northgate Plant 3
Business unit ▸ Northgate Quality 46
Business unit ▸ Riverside Plant 18
───
100 ← "100 records · Showing first 100 records."
The grouping is client-side over the fetched page. The request is top=100, and the store holds 186 tasks across five business units — 61 / 86 / 31 / 7 / 1 per the count in #76. So:
- one business unit has no group at all on page 1, and nothing on screen says a unit is missing;
- the counts that are shown are page slices, not totals (the largest unit holds 86 rows in the store; its header reads 46).
Why it is worth a card rather than a shrug
The footer does disclose "Showing first 100 records. More data may be available." — but the number that reads as authoritative is the one in the group header, next to the unit's name, and that number is a slice. This is the same shape as #76 itself: nothing errors, the screen is internally consistent, and it reads as data rather than as a bug. A manager's org lens is exactly where a partial count is most likely to be taken as a total.
Note that #76's own acceptance criterion says "counts summing to the visible row total", so the page scoping was known and accepted there. This card is only about whether it should stay that way, and it is unmeasured beyond the above — no view has been changed for it.
Options, unranked
- Leave it. Grouping is a page-level convenience; the footer already discloses the truncation.
- Raise the page size on the grouped lens if the view schema exposes it — cheap, and it moves the cliff rather than removing it.
- Server-side grouping / aggregate counts — the honest fix, and probably a platform capability question rather than an app one (the dashboard's "Not moving, by business unit" chart already groups server-side through a dataset and gets true totals).
No file is assigned; needs triage rather than an implementation.
Observation, not a regression — noticed while verifying #76 in the browser and deliberately kept out of that PR.
Measured
With #76's fix in place (
business_unitnow fetched),/_console/apps/ai.objectstack.duly/duly_task/view/by_uniton the #75 seed renders:The grouping is client-side over the fetched page. The request is
top=100, and the store holds 186 tasks across five business units — 61 / 86 / 31 / 7 / 1 per the count in #76. So:Why it is worth a card rather than a shrug
The footer does disclose "Showing first 100 records. More data may be available." — but the number that reads as authoritative is the one in the group header, next to the unit's name, and that number is a slice. This is the same shape as #76 itself: nothing errors, the screen is internally consistent, and it reads as data rather than as a bug. A manager's org lens is exactly where a partial count is most likely to be taken as a total.
Note that #76's own acceptance criterion says "counts summing to the visible row total", so the page scoping was known and accepted there. This card is only about whether it should stay that way, and it is unmeasured beyond the above — no view has been changed for it.
Options, unranked
No file is assigned; needs triage rather than an implementation.