Welcome to the new Box Support website. Check out all the details here on what’s changed.

Box Status

Unexpected paging for GET - File Collaborations

Answered
Follow
New post
xhocquet

Hello,

I discovered some unexpected behavior with a specific API call while working on Boxr today.

 

If you look at the API doc for the 'Get file collaborations' action, you'll notice the paging parameters are offset + limit, Box's offset-based pagination. However, when actually making the API call, the results return with the marker-based  pagination response fields (next_marker, previous_marker).

 

Is the documentation incorrect or does the API need to be updated to offset-based pagination?

 

Cheers,

Xavier Hocquet

0

Comments

4 comments

Date Votes
  • jcleblanc

    Hi ,

     

    I ran some tests and verified the same thing that you're seeing. Even when forcing marker based pagination off (usemarker=false) marker based pagination results are still being returned. I have a ticket filed with the filesystem team so that we can take a look - I'll update here when I hear back on whether this is something that we need to adjust with the endpoint return values or with the docs.

     

    Thanks,

    Jon

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • cbetta

     the old API docs actually suggest this endpoint uses marker based pagination.

     

     thank you for the feedback. We recently merged a few API documentation sources and this mistake seems to have crept in. I will update the documentation today.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • xhocquet

      Great, thanks for the update and quick resolution! Just curious, is there any reason this particular endpoint still uses marker-based pagination, or is it just legacy code?

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • cbetta

    We have no plans to change the pagination here. Often, the type of marker is dependent on the nature of the underlying data model.  In some cases it's either hard or unrealistic (e.g. event feed) to reliably know the size of the full set upfront. In the case of collaborations, this is probably related to having to unpack groups into their individual users.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.