Decide where the work belongs
Describe the late consequence
Compare what the preview tells users with what happens when later records execute. Record wasted waiting, partial completion, unexpected coercion, or a clear recoverable rejection. Keep these outcomes separate; a later error with no state change is different from accepted values that no longer preserve the source meaning.
Measure relevant file exposure
Group affected imports by file size, ordering, and the property that changes after the sample. Compare successful files with similar shapes. Do not use total upload volume as the affected population when the defect requires a late mixed-type value or a particular source ordering to appear.
Assess a clearer readiness boundary
Check whether the existing flow can distinguish preview from complete validation and whether users can inspect rejected rows before commitment. Estimate correction effort after a late failure. A clearer label may help expectations, but it does not resolve silent coercion or partial writes that require a separate behavior change.
What to carry forward
Record priority with the misleading claim, observed late outcome, affected file shape, and recovery cost. Assign a trigger such as silent value change or a newly common mixed-type export. Keep presentation fixes distinct from the work needed to establish a reliable whole-file acceptance boundary.
Technical background: DuckDB documentation.
Keep the decision with the work.
Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.
Create an account See the product workflow