Difference between loading 1 OFX file or more at once

[Guus Bonnema]

When importing an OFX file I noticed that homebank easily finds bookings that are already there. That is a real good thing. When I load the *same* OFX files in one go, homebank books the same transactions multiple times (as often as in the files).

It makes sense that double bookings in the *same OFX file* would result in double bookings, but if they are in different files, there should be no difference whether we load them in separate sessions or in one session?

I imagina a commit between each of the files, so homebank can still see double bookings accros files. Could it be that homebank just merges the files before updating them into the database? If so, that would cause it to not recognize double bookings, even if the FITID's are the same.

OS: Fedora 30
homebank: 5.2.7
GTK+: 3.24.10

[Maxime DOYEN (mdoyen)]

this is right and wrong, as this detection cannot be accurate and always need a human validation, that's why I chose 'similar' txn and not 'duplicate' as a terminology.

A) a similar between 2 different files:
can be right: if there is no overlap dates
can be wrong if not, I for example have different file with some overlaps and in that case I do have real duplicates in different files

B) a similar within the same file:
if you have 3 saving account you xfer same amount at same date every month, 2 txn will be detected as potential duplicate but are in fact not

you see: if the detection occurs globally (every file into the session) or individually, some false positive can remains until a Human or IA bring knowledge and smartness into this.

[Guus Bonnema (gbonnema)]

The usability of importing a list of files suggests that there is no difference between importing them separately or importing them as a group. That is why I was surprised when the results were different.

Would it be helpful if you treated the files, that are in the list, as separate sets of transactions? As if they were imported 1 by 1. This would mean that people could have multiple screens to agree to (one for each file). The difference between mass-import and separate import would disappear though and human checks would be identical. Doing 20 imports is a lot messier, than doing 1 import for 20 files.

The result would be ease of import, but the same human Ok to `similar` transactions. Does that help?

P.S. I assume from you comment, you do not use the FITID which should identify the transactions within an account uniquely?

[Guus Bonnema (gbonnema)]

Any reason for the change of status? i.e. removal from wishlist?

[Maxime DOYEN (mdoyen)]

yes, i was hesiting between wish and bug, and choose bug

the deduplicate is a post process, maybe I should consider use fitid for OFX at least

[Guus Bonnema (gbonnema)]

On 21-02-2021 19:13, Maxime DOYEN wrote:
> yes, i was hesiting between wish and bug, and choose bug
>
> the deduplicate is a post process, maybe I should consider use fitid for
> OFX at least

Thank you, I agree. That would be really helpful.

>
> ** Changed in: homebank
> Status: New => Confirmed
>
> ** Changed in: homebank
> Milestone: None => 5.5.1
>
> ** Changed in: homebank
> Assignee: (unassigned) => Maxime DOYEN (mdoyen)
>