# JDBC Merging Configuration Corruption via Configuration Hub Backup/Restore

**URL:** <https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/jdbc-merging-configuration-corruption-via-configuration-hub-backup-restore/206902>\
**Category:** SHF Discussion and Questions\
**Tags:** configuration-hub, sailpoint-identity-security\
**Created:** [May 6, 2026, 5:46am UTC](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/jdbc-merging-configuration-corruption-via-configuration-hub-backup-restore/206902 "2026-05-06T05:46:49Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Hanushma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/bc8723/32.png) [@Hanushma](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/u/Hanushma)\
**Post date:** [May 6, 2026, 5:46am UTC](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/jdbc-merging-configuration-corruption-via-configuration-hub-backup-restore/206902/1 "2026-05-06T05:46:49Z")

</div>

Hi EXPERTS,

I am experiencing an inconsistency when using Configuration Hub to back up and restore JDBC applications that have merging enabled. After restoring a deleted source from a Configuration Hub draft, the merging configuration structure changes, leading to aggregation failures.

**Steps to Reproduce**

1. Perform a backup of a JDBC application (with merging enabled) using Configuration Hub.

2. Delete the original source from the system.

3. Restore the source using the saved Draft in Configuration Hub.

4. **Observation:** Compare the merging configuration before backup and after restoration.

**Configuration Comparison**  
**Stage 1. Original State**  
**Expected Behavior / State:** Merging configuration is correctly defined as below  
Group.mergeRows: **false** and Group.indexColumns:[**F\_ID\_MASTER**] .  
**Actual Result:** Works as expected; aggregations succeed.  
**Stage 2. Backup JSON**  
\*\*Expected Behavior / State :\*\*The JSON file exported via Config Hub should match the API/XML definition.  
Group.mergeRows: **false** and Group.indexColumns:[**F\_ID\_MASTER**]  
**Actual Result:** The JSON reflects the correct configuration.  
**Stage 3. Post-Restore**  
**Expected Behavior / State:** Configuration should be identical to Stage 1. but changed as below  
Group.mergeRows: **true** and Group.indexColumns:[**F\_ID\_SLAVE**] (THIS IS WRONG)  
**Actual Result: Configuration is altered** (Group.mergeRows: **true** and Group.indexColumns:[**F\_ID\_SLAVE**]  
), causing aggregation to fail.  
**Impact**

- **Aggregation Failure:** The restored source cannot process data due to the malformed merging logic.

- **Manual Overhead:** Currently requires manual intervention via API to fix the configuration, which is not scalable for environments with numerous JDBC applications.

**Can any one please help me on the below?**

- Is this a known limitation of Configuration Hub when handling the mergeRows or indexColumn attributes in JDBC?

- Why does the Draft restoration process modify the JSON structure specifically for merging configurations?

cheers,

VJ

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![MattUribe](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/sailpoint/discuss/user_avatar/developer.sailpoint.com/matturibe/32/20300_2.png) [@MattUribe](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/u/MattUribe)\
**Post date:** [May 6, 2026, 10:42am UTC](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/jdbc-merging-configuration-corruption-via-configuration-hub-backup-restore/206902/3 "2026-05-06T10:42:42Z")

</div>

Hi @awadyafai

I wonder, have you read this policy?

[https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/pub/ai-usage-policy](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/pub/ai-usage-policy)

The only thing that needed to be said was “Create a case with SailPoint support”. There’s not much else we in the Dev Community can do with an SP provided tool that isn’t working as expected.

Matt

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![awadyafai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@awadyafai](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/u/awadyafai)\
**Post date:** [May 6, 2026, 11:17am UTC](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/jdbc-merging-configuration-corruption-via-configuration-hub-backup-restore/206902/4 "2026-05-06T11:17:19Z")

</div>

Hi @MattUribe

Point taken — I should have kept it simple and directed VJ straight to support. Thanks for the reminder about the AI usage policy, too. I’ll be more mindful going forward.

And yes, “raise a support case” was really the only actionable answer here.

Appreciate it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/sailpoint/original/2X/f/f2136700ed5e3703e0b85e02f6be799dacca7735.png) [@system](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/u/system)\
**Post date:** [July 5, 2026, 11:18am UTC](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/jdbc-merging-configuration-corruption-via-configuration-hub-backup-restore/206902/5 "2026-07-05T11:18:11Z")

</div>

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.