I am using Indicative in my project to validate my controller, but, Indicative don't have a "Unique" rule in "Validation Rules", but the framework Adonis have a rule call "unique" that does exactly what i need.
My project is made in Adonis, but i prefer to use "Indicative" and not "Validator" in Adonis, because i think is more easy and beautiful write the code direct in the Controller
code: 'required|string|max:255',
description: 'required|string|max:255|unique:tabela',
authors: 'string|max:255',
status: 'boolean',
user_id: 'integer',
created_at: [
importValidate.validations.dateFormat(['YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm:ss'])
],
updated_at: [
importValidate.validations.dateFormat(['YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm:ss'])
]
}
In the example above, I need the "code" to be "Unique" and return an error message and a response status. How can I do this?
The unique method of Validator will automatically search in the database. I don't think it's possible to do it with Indicative
I propose this solution (in your controller):
const { validate } = use('Validator')
...
const rules = {
code: 'unique:<table_name>,<field_name>'
}
const messages = {
'code.unique': '...'
}
const validation = await validate({ code: ... }, rules, messages)
if (validation.fails()) {
...
}
To use this command it is necessary to use Validator. I don't think there's an equivalent with Indicative
Related
Good morning.
I'm quite new to NodeJS / sequelize world and I'm currently facing a problem while trying to display a dashboard on screen.
This dashboard has three filters: two dates (period), client name, and employee name. The user can select none, one, two, or all the filters and my database needs to work accordingly.
That being said, my problem is with Sequelize because I don't know how to treat this problem of parameters not being "always" there.
I've seen this question:
Sequelize optional where clause parameters?
but this answer doesn't work anymore. I also tried another way of building the where clause, but I failed on it as well (mainly due to sequelize operators).
The last thing I tried was to make a single query with all parameters included but try to find some value (or flag) that would make sequelize ignore the parameter, for the case when the parameter was no there*, but it looks like Sequelize doesn't have anything like that.
* I've read a question here that has an answer saying that {} would do the trick but I tried that as well but didn't work.
In summary: I need to make a query that can "change" over time, for example:
Foo.findAll({
where: {
id : 1,
}
});
Foo.findAll({
where: {
id {
[Op.in] : [1,2,3,4,5]
},
name: "palmeiira",
}
});
Do you know a way of doing it without the need of using a lot if / switch statements?
I'm currently using Sequelize v. 5.5.1.
Update
I tried doing as suggested by #Anatoly and created a function to build the parameters. It was something like that. (I tried a "smaller" version just to test)
async function test() {
const where = {};
where[Op.and] = [];
where[Op.eq].push({
id: {
[Op.in]: [1,2,3]
}
});
return where;
}
I setted the return value to a const:
const query = await test()
And tried console.log(query)
The result was: { [Symbol(and)]: [ { id: [Object] } ] }, which made me believe that the problem was parsing the Op part so i tried using 'Op.and' and 'Op.in' to avoid that and it solved this problem, but led to another on sequelize that said Invalid value
Do you have any idea where is my error ?
P.S.: #Anatoly very nice idea you gave me on original answer. Thank you very much.
If these three conditions should work together then you can use Op.and with an array of conditions:
const where = {}
if (datesFilter || clientNameFilter || employeenameFilter) {
where[Op.and] = []
if (datesFilter) {
where[Op.and].push({
dateField: {
[Op.between]: [datesFilter.start, datesFilter.finish]
}
})
}
if (clientNameFilter) {
where[Op.and].push({
name: {
[Op.iLike]: `%${clientNameFilter.value}%`
}
})
}
if (employeenameFilter) {
where[Op.and].push({
employeeName: {
[Op.iLike]: `%${employeenameFilter.value}%`
}
})
}
}
const dashboardItems = await DashboardItem.findAll({ where }, {
// some options here
})
If the conditions should work as alternatives then just replace Op.and with Op.or
I've spent quite a bit of time reading through the GraphQL tutorials but unfortunately they don't seem to cover things in quite enough depth for me to get my head around. I'd really appreciate some help with this real world example.
In the examples the queries are placed at the root of the resolver object; I can get this to work fine for single level queries. When I attempt to resolve a nested query however the nested resolver never gets called. What I'm massively confused by is every tutorial I find that isn't issued on the graphql website put in a Query object and nest their queries underneeth that, not root level.
Consider the following Schema:
type Product {
id: String!
retailerId: String!
title: String!
description: String
price: String!
currency: String!
}
type OrderLine {
product: Product!
quantity: Int!
}
type Order {
id: String!
retailerId: String!
orderDate: Date!
orderLines: [OrderLine!]!
}
type Query {
product(id: String!): Product
order(id: String!): Order
}
schema {
query: Query
}
And the following query:
query {
order(id: "1") {
id
orderLines {
quantity
}
}
}
I have tried multiple versions of implementing the resolvers (just test data for now) and none seem to return what I exect. This is my current resolver implementation:
const resolvers = {
OrderLine: {
quantity: () => 1,
},
Order: {
orderLines: (parent: any, args: any) => { console.log("Calling order lines"); return []; },
},
Query: {
product(parent, args, ctx, other) {
return { id: args.id.toString(), test: true };
},
order: ({ id }) => { console.log("Calling order 1"); return { id: id.toString(), testOrder: true, orderLines: [] }; },
},
order: ({ id }) => { console.log("Calling order 2"); return { id: id.toString(), testOrder: true, orderLines: [] }; },
};
In the console I can oberse the "Calling order 2" log message, there are no logs to "Calling order lines" and the order lines array is empty.
So two part question:
1) Why does it hit "Calling order 2" and not "Calling order 1" in the above example?
2) Why won't the above work for the nested query Order.OrderLines?
Thanks in advance!
In query
type Query {
product(id: String!): Product
order(id: String!): Order
users: User
}
schema {
query: Query
}
In resolvers
const resolvers = {
order: ({ id }) => function
product: ({ id }) => function
}
Graphql work on query resolver concept. If you want to any query(example users) you must have
resolver(ie users) which return User having definition in type User.
Graphql query is interactive and case sensitive
The next step is to implement the resolver function for the order/product query.
In fact, one thing we haven’t mentioned yet is that not only root fields,
but virtually all fields on the types in a GraphQL schema have resolver functions.
1) Why does it hit "Calling order 2" and not "Calling order 1" in the above example?
In this Query
query {
order(id: "1") {
id
orderLines {
quantity
}
}
}
then it go to order which return Order with define type
2) Why won't the above work for the nested query Order.OrderLines?
You can only use two query first order and second product only as per your schema
Please check doc for nested query for this requirement.
If you use buildSchema to generate your schema, the only way to provide resolvers for your fields is through the root object. But this is more of a hack -- you're not actually overriding the default resolvers for the fields and as such, you're basically limited to just working with the root-level fields (as you are learning the hard way). This is why only the Query.order function is called -- this is a root-level field. Why passing functions through the root (kind of) works is explained in detail here.
The bottom line is you shouldn't be using buildSchema. If you want to use SDL to define your schema, migrate to using Apollo Server.
I was thinking about ways of implementing graphql response that would contain both an error and data.
Is it possible to do so without creating a type that would contain error?
e.g.
Mutation addMembersToTeam(membersIds: [ID!]! teamId: ID!): [Member] adds members to some team. Suppose this mutation is called with the following membersIds: [1, 2, 3].
Members with ids 1 and 2 are already in the team, so an error must be thrown that these members cannot be added, but member with an id 3 should be added as he is not in the team.
I was thinking about using formatResponse but seems that I can't get an error there.
Is it possible to solve this problem without adding error field to the return type?
Is it possible to solve this problem without adding error field to the return type?
Unfortunately, no.
A resolver can either return data, or return null and throw an error. It cannot do both. To clarify, it is possible to get a partial response and some errors. A simple example:
const typeDefs = `
type Query {
foo: Foo
}
type Foo {
a: String
b: String
}
`
const resolvers = {
Query: {
foo: () => {},
}
Foo: {
a: () => 'A',
b: () => new Error('Oops!'),
}
}
In this example, querying both fields on foo will result in the following response:
{
"data": {
"foo": {
"a": "A",
"b": null
}
},
"errors": [
{
"message": "Oops",
"locations": [
{
"line": 6,
"column": 5
}
],
"path": [
"foo",
"b"
]
}
]
}
In this way, it's possible to send back both data and errors. But you cannot do so for the same field, like in your question. There's a couple of ways around this. As you point out, you could return the errors as part of the response, which is usually how this is done. You could then use formatResponse, walk the resulting data, extract any errors and combine them with them with any other GraphQL errors. Not optimal, but it may get you the behavior you're looking for.
Another alternative is to modify the mutation so it takes a single memberId. You can then request a separate mutation for each id you're adding:
add1: addMemberToTeam(memberId: $memberId1 teamId: $teamId): {
id
}
add2: addMemberToTeam(memberId: $memberId2 teamId: $teamId): {
id
}
add3: addMemberToTeam(memberId: $memberId3 teamId: $teamId): {
id
}
This can be trickier to handle client-side, and is of course less efficient, but again might get you the expected behavior.
If you think about combining the GraphQL error - there is a way to do it in Apollo.
You need to set errorPolicy to all. That will help you notify users about the error and at the same time have as much data as possible.
none: This is the default policy to match how Apollo Client 1.0
worked. Any GraphQL Errors are treated the same as network errors and
any data is ignored from the response.
ignore: Ignore allows you to
read any data that is returned alongside GraphQL Errors, but doesn’t
save the errors or report them to your UI.
all: Using the all policy
is the best way to notify your users of potential issues while still
showing as much data as possible from your server. It saves both data
and errors into the Apollo Cache so your UI can use them.
But according to best practices, you shouldn't manipulate it in this way.
This is a great article about handling errors in GraphQL.
So, preferable way is to add "errors" field as part of your response and handle it in JS code.
We can achieve this by using a union. I would recommend visiting the great article Handling GraphQL errors like a champ
Example:
Mutation part: We can return the union type for the response & capture the result according to types.
type MemberType {
id: ID!
name: String!
}
enum ErrorType {
BAD_REQUEST_ERROR
FORBIDDEN_ERROR
INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR
NOT_FOUND_ERROR
UNAUTHORIZED_ERROR
}
type GraphqlError {
type: ErrorType!
code: String!
message: String!
helpLink: URL
}
union UserRegisterResult = MemberType | GraphqlError;
addMembersToTeam(membersIds: [ID!]! teamId: ID!): UserRegisterResult!
Response:
addMembersToTeam(membersIds: [ID!]! teamId: ID!): {
...on MemberType{
id,
name,
}
...on GraphqlError{
id,
message,
statusCode,
}
}
I am new to AVRO and please excuse me if it is a simple question.
I have a use case where I am using AVRO schema for record calls.
Let's say I have avro schema
{
"name": "abc",
"namepsace": "xyz",
"type": "record",
"fields": [
{"name": "CustId", "type":"string"},
{"name": "SessionId", "type":"string"},
]
}
Now if the input is like
{
"CustId" : "abc1234"
"sessionID" : "000-0000-00000"
}
I want to use some regex validations for these fields and I want take this input only if it comes in particular format shown as above. Is there any way to specify in avro schema to include regex expression?
Any other data serialization formats which supports something like this?
You should be able to use a custom logical type for this. You would then include the regular expressions directly in the schema.
For example, here's how you would implement one in JavaScript:
var avro = require('avsc'),
util = require('util');
/**
* Sample logical type that validates strings using a regular expression.
*
*/
function ValidatedString(attrs, opts) {
avro.types.LogicalType.call(this, attrs, opts);
this._pattern = new RegExp(attrs.pattern);
}
util.inherits(ValidatedString, avro.types.LogicalType);
ValidatedString.prototype._fromValue = function (val) {
if (!this._pattern.test(val)) {
throw new Error('invalid string: ' + val);
}
return val;
};
ValidatedString.prototype._toValue = ValidatedString.prototype._fromValue;
And how you would use it:
var type = avro.parse({
name: 'Example',
type: 'record',
fields: [
{
name: 'custId',
type: 'string' // Normal (free-form) string.
},
{
name: 'sessionId',
type: {
type: 'string',
logicalType: 'validated-string',
pattern: '^\\d{3}-\\d{4}-\\d{5}$' // Validation pattern.
}
},
]
}, {logicalTypes: {'validated-string': ValidatedString}});
type.isValid({custId: 'abc', sessionId: '123-1234-12345'}); // true
type.isValid({custId: 'abc', sessionId: 'foobar'}); // false
You can read more about implementing and using logical types here.
Edit: For the Java implementation, I believe you will want to look at the following classes:
LogicalType, the base you'll need to extend.
Conversion, to perform the conversion (or validation in your case) of the data.
LogicalTypes and Conversions, a few examples of existing implementations.
TestGenericLogicalTypes, relevant tests which could provide a helpful starting point.
I am new to node.js and newer to Sails.js framework.
I am currently trying to work with my database, I don't understand all the things with Sails.js but I manage to do what I want step by step. (I am used to some PHP MVC frameworks so it is not too difficult to understand the structure.)
Here I am trying to get a row from my database, using 2 JOIN clause. I managed to do this using SQL and the Model.query() function, but I would like to do this in a "cleaner" way.
So I have 3 tables in my database: meta, lang and meta_lang. It's quite simple and a picture being better than words, here are some screenshots.
meta
lang
meta_lang
What I want to do is to get the row in meta_table that match with 'default' meta and 'en' lang (for example).
Here are Meta and Lang models (I created them with sails generate model command and edited them with what I needed):
Meta
module.exports = {
attributes: {
code : { type: 'string' },
metaLangs:{
collection: 'MetaLang',
via: 'meta'
}
}
};
Lang
module.exports = {
attributes: {
code : { type: 'string' },
metaLangs:{
collection: 'MetaLang',
via: 'lang'
}
}
};
And here is my MetaLang model, with 3 functions I created to test several methods. The first function, findCurrent, works perfectly, but as you can see I had to write SQL. That is what I want to avoid if it is possible, I find it more clean (and I would like to use Sails.js tools as often as I can).
module.exports = {
tableName: 'meta_lang',
attributes: {
title : { type: 'string' },
description : { type: 'text' },
keywords : { type: 'string' },
meta:{
model:'Meta',
columnName: 'meta_id'
},
lang:{
model:'Lang',
columnName: 'lang_id'
}
},
findCurrent: function (metaCode, langCode) {
var query = 'SELECT ml.* FROM meta_lang ml INNER JOIN meta m ON m.id = ml.meta_id INNER JOIN lang l ON l.id = ml.lang_id WHERE m.code = ? AND l.code = ?';
MetaLang.query(query, [metaCode, langCode], function(err, metaLang) {
console.log('findCurrent');
if (err) return console.log(err);
console.log(metaLang);
// OK this works exactly as I want (I would have prefered a 'findOne' result, only 1 object instead of an array with 1 object in it, but I can do with it.)
});
},
findCurrentTest: function (metaCode, langCode) {
Meta.findByCode(metaCode).populate('metaLangs').exec(function(err, metaLang) {
console.log('findCurrentTest');
if (err) return console.log(err);
console.log(metaLang);
// I get what I expected (though not what I want): my meta + all metaLangs related to meta with code "default".
// What I want is to get ONE metaLang related to meta with code "default" AND lang with code "en".
});
},
findCurrentOthertest: function (metaCode, langCode) {
MetaLang.find().populate('meta', {where: {code:metaCode}}).populate('lang', {where: {code:langCode}}).exec(function(err, metaLang) {
console.log('findCurrentOthertest');
if (err) return console.log(err);
console.log(metaLang);
// Doesn't work as I wanted: it gets ALL the metaLang rows.
});
}
};
I also tried to first get my Meta by code, then my Lang by code, and MetaLang using Meta.id and Lang.id . But I would like to avoid 3 queries when I can have only one.
What I'm looking for would be something like MetaLang.find({meta.code:"default", lang.code:"en"}).
Hope you've got all needed details, just comment and ask for more if you don't.
Do you know what populate is for ? its for including the whole associated object when loading it from the database. Its practically the join you are trying to do, if all you need is row retrieval than quering the table without populate will make both functions you built work.
To me it looks like you are re-writing how Sails did the association. Id suggest giving the Associations docs another read in Sails documentation: Associations. As depending on your case you are just trying a one-to-many association with each table, you could avoid a middle table in my guess, but to decide better id need to understand your use-case.
When I saw the mySQL code it seemed to me you are still thinking in MySQL and PHP which takes time to convert from :) forcing the joins and middle tables yourself, redoing a lot of the stuff sails automated for you. I redone your example on 'disk' adapter and it worked perfectly. The whole point of WaterlineORM is to abstract the layer of going down to SQL unless absolutely necessary. Here is what I would do for your example, first without SQL just on a disk adapter id create the models :
// Lang.js
attributes: {
id :{ type: "Integer" , autoIncrement : true, primaryKey: true },
code :"string"
}
you see what i did redundantly here ? I did not really need the Id part as Sails does it for me. Just an example.
// Meta.js
attributes: {
code :"string"
}
better :) ?
// MetaLang.js
attributes:
{
title : "string",
desc : "string",
meta_id :
{
model : "meta",
},
lang_id :
{
model : "lang",
}
}
Now after simply creating the same values as your example i run sails console type :
MetaLang.find({meta_id : 1 ,lang_id:2}).exec(function(er,res){
console.log(res);
});
Output >>>
sails> [ { meta_id: 1,
lang_id: 2,
title: 'My blog',
id: 2 } ]
Now if you want to display what is meta with id 1 and what is lang with id 2, we use populate, but the referencing for join/search is just as simple as this.
sails> Meta_lang.find({meta_id : 1 ,lang_id:2}).populate('lang_id').populate('meta_id').exec(function(er,res){ console.log(res); });
undefined
sails> [ {
meta_id:
{ code: 'default',
id: 1 },
lang_id:
{ code: 'En',
id: 2 },
title: 'My blog',
id: 2 } ]
At this point, id switch adapters to MySQL and then create the MySQL tables with the same column names as above. Create the FK_constraints and voila.
Another strict policy you can add is to set up the 'via' and dominance on each model. you can read more about that in the Association documentation and it depends on the nature of association (many-to-many etc.)
To get the same result without knowing the Ids before-hand :
sails> Meta.findOne({code : "default"}).exec(function(err,needed_meta){
..... Lang.findOne({code : "En"}).exec(function(err_lang,needed_lang){
....... Meta_lang.find({meta_id : needed_meta.id , lang_id : needed_lang.id}).exec(function(err_all,result){
......... console.log(result);});
....... });
..... });
undefined
sails> [ { meta_id: 1,
lang_id: 2,
title: 'My blog',
id: 2 } ]
Have you tried:
findCurrentTest: function (metaCode, langCode) {
Meta.findByCode(metaCode).populate('metaLangs', {where: {code:langCode}}).exec(function(err, metaLang) {
console.log('findCurrentTest');
if (err) return console.log(err);
console.log(metaLang);
});
},