Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
We are closely monitoring the effects of changing the item number for 4 basic
parts earlier today. There have been reports that Brickstore is having issues
and now you are reporting about API.
Please take a look here for the 4 numbers that were changed:
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
We are closely monitoring the effects of changing the item number for 4 basic
parts earlier today. There have been reports that Brickstore is having issues
and now you are reporting about API.
Please take a look here for the 4 numbers that were changed:
I don't believe these are connected, if they are it does not make sense.
The part that was being updated was '53562'.
I used (Get Store Inventory -- GET /inventories/{inventory_id}) to check
the item was still available and quantity was available before attempting to
update the inventory.
Update Inventory does not user the item_no, it uses the inventory_id so the two
should not be connected.
Thanks for getting back to me so quickly, this is a breaking change.
We encountered as well an issue with Brickstore by exporting a part out from
Brickstore that included any of the 3062b, 3068b, 3069b, or 3070b, and they were
rejected while trying to upload stating that the code does not exist. Couldn’t
Bricklink accept the xml by recognizing the 3062b as a 3062?
We had to modify the XML before importing them because there were no way we could
use 3062 as a code in Brickstore.
Sylvain
In Technical Issues, Admin_Russell writes:
In Technical Issues, BrickFreedom writes:
Hi
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
We are closely monitoring the effects of changing the item number for 4 basic
parts earlier today. There have been reports that Brickstore is having issues
and now you are reporting about API.
Please take a look here for the 4 numbers that were changed:
We encountered as well an issue with Brickstore by exporting a part out from
Brickstore that included any of the 3062b, 3068b, 3069b, or 3070b, and they were
rejected while trying to upload stating that the code does not exist. Couldn’t
Bricklink accept the xml by recognizing the 3062b as a 3062?
It's normal, 3062b is now an invalid reference.
Simply wait BrickStore has a fresh database, then reopen the file and it'll
be corrected?
You people could be a bit patient; BrickStore it's a guy working for free
for you
You people could be a bit patient; BrickStore it's a guy working for free
for you
Shocking, right? You pay big money for the premium support package and then that
lazy guy in a totally different time zone is not monitoring the BL item change-log
24/7
We encountered as well an issue with Brickstore by exporting a part out from
Brickstore that included any of the 3062b, 3068b, 3069b, or 3070b, and they were
rejected while trying to upload stating that the code does not exist. Couldn’t
Bricklink accept the xml by recognizing the 3062b as a 3062?
It's normal, 3062b is now an invalid reference.
Simply wait BrickStore has a fresh database, then reopen the file and it'll
be corrected?
You people could be a bit patient; BrickStore it's a guy working for free
for you
I didn't get any impression that they were being impatient, just reporting
an issue. For all anyone knows they could be paying for BrickStore - there is
a donate option if anyone feels so inclined.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
We are closely monitoring the effects of changing the item number for 4 basic
parts earlier today. There have been reports that Brickstore is having issues
and now you are reporting about API.
Please take a look here for the 4 numbers that were changed:
Russell, can you push an update for the database source used by BrickStore immediately
after each change?
I just opened BrickStore and it did a fresh "updating BrickLInk inventory"
and opened a file that had 3062b, 3068b and 3070b. Those were still valid in
BrisckStore and the umbrella IDs were not. Trying to update price guide on
the 'b' versions returned an error.
This might also have a similar impact on Bricksync if its pulling the same 'database'
file as BrickStore.
Admin Russell, you did not understand what BrickFreedom was posting.
The API that updates inventory by a quantity (+ or -), is intermittently breaking
on part numbers that are not within your 4 changed parts.
This will break every piece of software that relies on updating Bricklink store
inventory using the API method.
Admin Russell, you did not understand what BrickFreedom was posting.
The API that updates inventory by a quantity (+ or -), is intermittently breaking
on part numbers that are not within your 4 changed parts.
This will break every piece of software that relies on updating Bricklink store
inventory using the API method.
I concur. The last failed update on our end was for
Admin Russell, you did not understand what BrickFreedom was posting.
The API that updates inventory by a quantity (+ or -), is intermittently breaking
on part numbers that are not within your 4 changed parts.
This will break every piece of software that relies on updating Bricklink store
inventory using the API method.
I concur. The last failed update on our end was for
Admin Russell, you did not understand what BrickFreedom was posting.
The API that updates inventory by a quantity (+ or -), is intermittently breaking
on part numbers that are not within your 4 changed parts.
This will break every piece of software that relies on updating Bricklink store
inventory using the API method.
I concur. The last failed update on our end was for
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
We are closely monitoring the effects of changing the item number for 4 basic
parts earlier today. There have been reports that Brickstore is having issues
and now you are reporting about API.
I can not do any PUT to /Inventory, as I could before. I am getting a similar
message in my custom software I use for adding inventory, picking, and shipping.
I also have not been able to pass a style tag via the api anymore since coming
back online after the cyber incident. Although, I can still do that in the UI
(which has changed too, details to come in another post.) It appears to be being
filtered on AWS and returning a 403 Forbidden. I have let the API team know,
but my last response from them was:
"The API and UI may have further changes very soon that could effect certain
HTML; expectation by end of month." That quote is from January.
Obviously, some of these changes have been put in place and not communicated
to the users of Bricklink.
It would really be nice if these changes were made in a much more public, stable,
and professional manner. But 'tis the Bricklink way to test in Production
on its users.
I was really hoping the MOC Popup shop deployment success was not a one off.
Sigh!
I sincerely hope we are not witnessing the beginning of the end of Bricklink.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
We are closely monitoring the effects of changing the item number for 4 basic
parts earlier today. There have been reports that Brickstore is having issues
and now you are reporting about API.
I can not do any PUT to /Inventory, as I could before. I am getting a similar
message in my custom software I use for adding inventory, picking, and shipping.
I also have not been able to pass a style tag via the api anymore since coming
back online after the cyber incident. Although, I can still do that in the UI
(which has changed too, details to come in another post.) It appears to be being
filtered on AWS and returning a 403 Forbidden. I have let the API team know,
but my last response from them was:
"The API and UI may have further changes very soon that could effect certain
HTML; expectation by end of month." That quote is from January.
Obviously, some of these changes have been put in place and not communicated
to the users of Bricklink.
It would really be nice if these changes were made in a much more public, stable,
and professional manner. But 'tis the Bricklink way to test in Production
on its users.
I was really hoping the MOC Popup shop deployment success was not a one off.
Sigh!
I sincerely hope we are not witnessing the beginning of the end of Bricklink.
Many stores that rely on Bricklink as a part of their business need the API for
accounting and to manage their inventory, this breaking changes to core functionality
can't be put in place when income to many families are in play without notice
to adapt...
Many stores that rely on Bricklink as a part of their business need the API for
accounting and to manage their inventory, this breaking changes to core functionality
can't be put in place when income to many families are in play without notice
to adapt...
Last entry there was February 2022 Obviously, there have been changes since
then. However, I concur with you sentiment.
Many stores that rely on Bricklink as a part of their business need the API for
accounting and to manage their inventory, this breaking changes to core functionality
can't be put in place when income to many families are in play without notice
to adapt...
Last entry there was February 2022 Obviously, there have been changes since
then. However, I concur with you sentiment.
We are closely monitoring the effects of changing the item number for 4 basic
parts earlier today. There have been reports that Brickstore is having issues
and now you are reporting about API.
Please take a look here for the 4 numbers that were changed:
Same here, seeing several parts (unrelated to renumbering) unable to be updated
via api simply returning a 400 error. Something is clearly broken.
I do not think everything was well thought out here. I just uploaded the Concorde
into my store and 8 common pieces were rejected-not in the catalog. Now I am
informed I should close my BO store! Very disappointing.
I can confirm that the changes made on the BO side worked properly so you shouldn't
need to close it. I ran a sync after the admin updated their trackers and all
137 errors from BL changing the IDs were fixed. You may need to update the BStore
DB to upload without issue.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
BrickFreedom, I am seeing the same API error in BrickSync, it occurred right
after a sale on BO when BSync attempted to modify the values on BL. I was 100%
after the changes were made to the BO inventory tracking system to identify the
BL numbers that were changed today.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
I know this issue is new but I had a BOwl order already in my queue and I see
that my Brick Link inventory has not updated from the sale. Do you think I should
go in and manually adjust my inventory or will it update once the issue is fixed?
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
I know this issue is new but I had a BOwl order already in my queue and I see
that my Brick Link inventory has not updated from the sale. Do you think I should
go in and manually adjust my inventory or will it update once the issue is fixed?
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
Well, I am not surprised. This was my point... Making changes should have been
done the professional way by Bricklink:
1. Set a date, communicate clear heads-up, to get everyone on the same page with
it: the sellers, the guys from all these apps
2. Give enough time for everyone to prepare an update and stand by
3. Apply the changes all at once exactly on that announced date
Unfortunately what we got was more of a "let's push a button and see
what happens" way... I suppose such problems are going to persist no matter
the updates, as long as Bricklink gradually keeps changing things unannounced,
constantly rendering the updates outdated.
It would also help if Bricklink exposed a stable surrogate key (itemId iirc)
via the API, so that syncing tools can still map parts correctly even when the
design/part/item number is changed.
It would also help if Bricklink exposed a stable surrogate key (itemId iirc)
via the API, so that syncing tools can still map parts correctly even when the
design/part/item number is changed.
Why? To facilitate people to sell elsewhere? See, I'm not sure...
It would also help if Bricklink exposed a stable surrogate key (itemId iirc)
via the API, so that syncing tools can still map parts correctly even when the
design/part/item number is changed.
Why? To facilitate people to sell elsewhere? See, I'm not sure...
You're making up motivations that I didn't express.
It's common to use offline inventory management tools (like BrickStore, or
many others, including custom solutions).
These all break to some degree when the design number changes because the Bricklink
API uses a mutable field as the identifier.
It would also help if Bricklink exposed a stable surrogate key (itemId iirc)
via the API, so that syncing tools can still map parts correctly even when the
design/part/item number is changed.
Why? To facilitate people to sell elsewhere? See, I'm not sure...
You're making up motivations that I didn't express.
"syncing tools"?
It's common to use offline inventory management tools (like BrickStore, or
many others, including custom solutions).
These all break to some degree when the design number changes because the Bricklink
API uses a mutable field as the identifier.
BrickStore didn't have a problem with this change - and other changes -,
it checks the catalog change logs.
Of course this could be nice for the 100/500 hyper computerized sellers.
Frankly, I'd prefer they spend time on something that'd help more (all)
sellers, and why not buyers.
Offline tools sync inventory as well. The term doesn't necessarily imply
synchronising between marketplaces.
It's also not just the API that relies on the design number. The internet
is full of links to Bricklink parts from forums etc. Those links are now broken
because they also use the design number as an identifier.
Offline tools sync inventory as well. The term doesn't necessarily imply
synchronising between marketplaces.
It's also not just the API that relies on the design number. The internet
is full of links to Bricklink parts from forums etc. Those links are now broken
because they also use the design number as an identifier.
It's also not just the API that relies on the design number. The internet
is full of links to Bricklink parts from forums etc. Those links are now broken
because they also use the design number as an identifier.
It would also help if Bricklink exposed a stable surrogate key (itemId iirc)
via the API, so that syncing tools can still map parts correctly even when the
design/part/item number is changed.
Why? To facilitate people to sell elsewhere? See, I'm not sure...
You're making up motivations that I didn't express.
"syncing tools"?
It's common to use offline inventory management tools (like BrickStore, or
many others, including custom solutions).
These all break to some degree when the design number changes because the Bricklink
API uses a mutable field as the identifier.
BrickStore didn't have a problem with this change - and other changes -,
it checks the catalog change logs.
Of course this could be nice for the 100/500 hyper computerized sellers.
Well, it's really not 'going an extra mile' to change things in a
clean, consistent way. That's just how you do anything in a professional
way. We're not asking for anything extra, we are asking for things to be
done in a non-chaotic way. You fix a road by announcing it, closing it, changing
it, then opening it again. If you start fixing small bits at a time and it causes
dangerous situations, you can't blame it on the drivers if something goes
wrong. We can praise Brickstore for being able to handle it, but it doesn't
excuse how Bricklink is doing this.
Frankly, I'd prefer they spend time on something that'd help more (all)
sellers, and why not buyers.
What helps all buyers is if I could be open for business, and right now I can't...
Clever, but I can do you one better
Why is it a minority? Because Bricklink does things this way. I'm not disappointed
in Bricklink because I am selling elsewhere - I am selling elsewhere because
I am disappointed in Bricklink.
It would also help if Bricklink exposed a stable surrogate key (itemId iirc)
via the API, so that syncing tools can still map parts correctly even when the
design/part/item number is changed.
Why? To facilitate people to sell elsewhere? See, I'm not sure...
As I explained before, selling elsewhere also means selling on bricklink. I would
not be able to run my store as it is with only the revenue from bricklink. So
selling on other platforms keep me selling on bricklink as well. When this possibility
brakes I will need to close the shop. And I know for sure, that I'm not the
only seller in this situation. Now, if the idea is to get rid of sellers, then
this type of action is exactly what is needed. But in the end it will mean also
less revenue for bricklink and therefore less revenue to maintain bricklink.
I don't have a shop with four sales a month so that fees can't be missed,
but I also don't sell over 400 orders a month to qualify for the staffeled
discount on fees. So, per sale I'm paying the full 100 percent on sales.
I guess that these type of stores are very much needed to generate enough income
to maintain and pay for the TCO of a website as bricklink. And yes, other marketplaces
are needed. Bricklink should never be a monopolist. That would create very unhealthy
market situations. And for buyers, not all of them are able to can get used to
the elaborate site of bricklink and it's steap learning curve. And last but
not least, how hypocritical would it be when bricklink would allow buyers websites
like rebrickable to make use of their content to sell to users that way?
Don't ever think that selling on other platforms is costing bricklink customers.
Because it isn't. Different customers, different preferences and different
orders, that's my experience. Even different geographical regions of the
world! So if the goal is to create a buyer friendly market.. Well. I think I
explained enough. 😉
It would also help if Bricklink exposed a stable surrogate key (itemId iirc)
via the API, so that syncing tools can still map parts correctly even when the
design/part/item number is changed.
Why? To facilitate people to sell elsewhere? See, I'm not sure...
I don't feel that supporting the API is just to help sellers sync with the
other marketplaces. There are many tools and software that rely on it and it's
not just sellers who use it.
Also, BrickLink has shown no movement whatsoever on needed seller tools. So the
least they can do is professionally maintain the API for those who have made
these for themselves.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
I can confirm relative updates are broken with the API.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
I can confirm relative updates are broken with the API.
Correction, inventory update using the API in general seems broken. Relative
or not.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
I can confirm relative updates are broken with the API.
Correction, inventory update using the API in general seems broken. Relative
or not.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
I can confirm relative updates are broken with the API.
Correction, inventory update using the API in general seems broken. Relative
or not.
The fix is to specify the "description" field.
{"quantity":4, "description":""}
Works fine and fixes it as far as I can tell.
I can confirm this works for negative quantity too!
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
I can confirm relative updates are broken with the API.
Correction, inventory update using the API in general seems broken. Relative
or not.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
I can confirm relative updates are broken with the API.
Correction, inventory update using the API in general seems broken. Relative
or not.
The fix is to specify the "description" field.
{"quantity":4, "description":""}
Works fine and fixes it as far as I can tell.
Thank you
Make sure you don't delete your descriptions if you use them, so specify
the existing description, or "" but not null or no description field.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
I can confirm relative updates are broken with the API.
Correction, inventory update using the API in general seems broken. Relative
or not.
I can't help but think someone at BL was a bit overzealous. With the merging
changes, the advice from BL was to put some text in the "description"
field to specify mold differences. Maybe this was construed as "now everything
needs a description", so the API was changed to now require a "description"
field...
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
Hi, same problem here :
"description": "String input must not be null",
"message": "PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID",
"code": 400
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
Hi, same problem here :
"description": "String input must not be null",
"message": "PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID",
"code": 400
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
We just pushed a fix for this to production. Please let us know if the problem
persists.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
We just pushed a fix for this to production. Please let us know if the problem
persists.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
We just pushed a fix for this to production. Please let us know if the problem
persists.
Have you made changes to the (Update Store Inventory -- PUT - /inventories/{inventory_id})
API request?
Previously you could call the API with the following parameters and would have
no issues:
['quantity' = '-2']
Now it's responding with:
["description":"String input must not be null","message":"PARAMETER_MISSING_OR_INVALID"]
Weirdly a couple of requests have completed successfully but most of the requests
are failing with the above error message. Can someone please advise what this
error is and if it's a bug that has been released into the API by accident?
We just pushed a fix for this to production. Please let us know if the problem
persists.
United Kingdom, England
Canada, Ontario
USA, California
France, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur
Germany, Bayern
Spain, Comunidad Valenciana
United Kingdom, Scotland
Netherlands, Utrecht
Australia, Western Australia
Belgium, Oost-Vlaanderen
