fix(server): People count after updating recognized faces count

[jedi04]

This PR fixes #13245

It updates the query used to fetch the total count of people keeping in consideration the recognized faces setting.

[alextran1502]

Thank you for the PR. Can you please run make sql from the root of the project?

[jedi04]

Thank you for the PR. Can you please run make sql from the root of the project?

Sure. I have run the command from root of project.

Thank you

[hitech95]

@jedi04 This open another series of issues.
@alextran1502 Imho this is a workaround on a deeper issue. See #13551

[zackpollard]

Hey @jedi04, I appreciate this has been open for quite a while. Just trying to go through some of our older PRs and cleanup. Is this ready to merge? I did a quick look through and I didn't really understand why you changed the SQL to have a subquery. From a brief look I feel like you could've just changed the HAVING statement to handle the minimum faces setting. Is there any other advantage to changing the query in this way?

[zackpollard]

@jedi04 This open another series of issues.

Could you expand on what other issues this opens in your eyes?

[hitech95]

@jedi04 This open another series of issues.

Could you expand on what other issues this opens in your eyes?

See #13551

[zackpollard]

@jedi04 This open another series of issues.

Could you expand on what other issues this opens in your eyes?

See #13551

I saw that issue but it isn't really clear to me why this fix is directly a problem. It sounds like there are more issues in this area, but this PR feels like a bug regardless, it doesn't need to fix all of the problems. I think it's fine to look to merge this change but also look at a broader solution to the problems you mention separately.

[hitech95]

@jedi04 This open another series of issues.

Could you expand on what other issues this opens in your eyes?

See #13551

I saw that issue but it isn't really clear to me why this fix is directly a problem. It sounds like there are more issues in this area, but this PR feels like a bug regardless, it doesn't need to fix all of the problems. I think it's fine to look to merge this change but also look at a broader solution to the problems you mention separately.

This only fix the returned counte of the people, by limiting the real count to those that only have a at least N faces.
it does not fix teh underlaying issue that the person is created but the faces are not attached to it.

If I have a person Y with 3 faces the person is created. if I delete one of the pictures the person Y still exist. but the counter will return a lower count (as it dont meet the threshold). I could have already named the person.
The result would be still out of sink. As I can still navigate to the person and fetch the related pictures from the timeline.

IMHO: limiting the count is not the correct way to fix this, the correct way is to ensure that the DB is consistent with the data.

[zackpollard]

@jedi04 This open another series of issues.

Could you expand on what other issues this opens in your eyes?

See #13551

I saw that issue but it isn't really clear to me why this fix is directly a problem. It sounds like there are more issues in this area, but this PR feels like a bug regardless, it doesn't need to fix all of the problems. I think it's fine to look to merge this change but also look at a broader solution to the problems you mention separately.

This only fix the returned counte of the people, by limiting the real count to those that only have a at least N faces. it does not fix teh underlaying issue that the person is created but the faces are not attached to it.

If I have a person Y with 3 faces the person is created. if I delete one of the pictures the person Y still exist. but the counter will return a lower count (as it dont meet the threshold). I could have already named the person. The result would be still out of sink. As I can still navigate to the person and fetch the related pictures from the timeline.

IMHO: limiting the count is not the correct way to fix this, the correct way is to ensure that the DB is consistent with the data.

I now understand the issue. In that case I agree, and it's probably better to fix that underlying issue then. In which case I think I will close this issue as it is a bandaid to the wider issue.

[mlinko6]

Hi,

I have the same issue, but I'm totally lost in finding a solution... What should I do in this case? My minimal face recognition is set to 3... How can I solve the issue?