I created an action to "Complete" a record. The action executes:
Actions.PressSave();
foreach(MyDAC record in Records)
{
myRecord.Status = Statuses.Complete;
this.MyView.Update(myRecord);
Save.Press(); <---
}
When I used Actions.PressSave(); at the bottom of the code sample (see the <---) it errors out. When I use Save.Press(); it works great.
What is the difference between the two? (How would I decide the appropriate selection between the two?)
Save.Press() is explicitly defined action on Graph. Actions.PressSave() is predefined graph action. Anyway, both will execute persist delegate.
Related
I'm trying to manipulate the Audit screen (SM205510) through code, using a graph object. The operation of the screen has processes that seem to work when a screen ID is selected in the header. This is my code to create a new record:
Using PX.Data;
Using PX.Objects.SM;
var am = PXGraph.CreateInstance<AUAuditMaintenance>();
AUAuditSetup auditsetup = new AUAuditSetup();
auditsetup.ScreenID = "GL301000";
auditsetup = am.Audit.Insert(auditsetup);
am.Actions.PressSave();
Now, when I execute the code above, it creates a record in the AUAuditSetup table just fine - but it doesn't automatically create the AUAuditTable records the way they are auto-generated in the screen (I realize that the records aren't in the database yet) - but how can I get the graph object to auto-generate the AUAuditTable records in the cache the way they are in the screen?
I've tried looking at the source code for the Audit screen - but it just shows blank, like there's nothing there. I look in the code repository in Visual Studio and I don't see any file for AUAuditMaintenance either, so I can't see any process that I could run in the graph object that would populate those AUAuditTable records.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks...
If I had such a need, to manipulate Audit screen records, I'd rather create my own graph and probably generate DAC class. Also I'd add one more column UsrIsArtificial and set it to false by default. And then manage them as ordinary records, but each time I'll add something, I'd set field UsrIsArtificial to false.
You can hardly find how that records are managed at graph level because that records are created and handled on on Graph level, but on framework level. Also think twice or even more about design, as direct writing into Audit history may cause confusion for users in the system of what was caused by user, and what was caused by your code. From that point of view I would rather add one more additional table, then add confusion to existing one.
Acumatica support provided this solution, which works beautifully (Hat tip!):
var screenID = "GL301000"; //"SO303000";
var g = PXGraph.CreateInstance<AUAuditMaintenance>();
//Set Header Current
g.Audit.Current = g.Audit.Search<AUAuditSetup.screenID>(screenID);
if (g.Audit.Current == null) //If no Current then insert
{
var header = new AUAuditSetup();
header.ScreenID = screenID;
header.Description = "Test Audit";
header = g.Audit.Insert(header);
}
foreach (AUAuditTable table in g.Tables.Select())
{
table.IsActive = true;
//Sets Current for Detail
g.Tables.Current = g.Tables.Update(table);
foreach (AUAuditField field in g.Fields.Select())
{
field.IsActive = false;
g.Fields.Update(field);
}
}
g.Actions.PressSave();
How do I make it so that when a bullet from the bullet group collides with an enemy from the enemy group, only the two hitting eachother will get affected?
I tried doing (In playstate):
if (FlxG.collide(bullet, enemy)){
bullet.kill();
enemy.kill();
}
But the only thing this succeeded in doing is killing the entire group. How do I only kill the ones affected?
In the Haxeflixel API docs:
collide(?ObjectOrGroup1:FlxBasic, ?ObjectOrGroup2:FlxBasic, ?NotifyCallback:Dynamic‑>Dynamic‑>Void):Bool
so I think you can use something like:
FlxG.collide(
groupBullets,
groupEnemies,
function (bullet:FlxObject, enemy:FlxObject):Void {
enemy.kill();
bullet.kill();
}
);
You want to pass in a notification callback:
https://github.com/HaxeFlixel/flixel/blob/24529ac96d4ad49a5f0c7e64799d0197cee9049e/flixel/FlxG.hx#L395
So something like this is what you want:
FlxG.collide(bulletGroup, enemyGroup, collideBulletEnemy));
function collideBulletEnemy(bullet:FlxObject, enemy:FlxObject):Void
{
bullet.kill();
enemy.kill();
}
Some more explanation:
The collide() function in flixel lets you pass in either an object or a group to either parameter, and tells you if those two things collide. In the case of two objects, you can directly follow that test up with logic operating on those two objects. But if one of the objects is a group, you don't know based on the test alone which things collided, so you need to rely on a callback you supply yourself to get that specific information.
I'm using Sequelize.js for ORM and have a few associations (which actually doesn't matter now). My models get get and set methods from those associations. Like this (from docs):
var User = sequelize.define('User', {/* ... */})
var Project = sequelize.define('Project', {/* ... */})
// One-way associations
Project.hasOne(User)
/*
...
Furthermore, Project.prototype will gain the methods getUser and setUser
according to the first parameter passed to define.
*/
So now, I have Project.getUser(), which returns a Promise. But if I call this twice on the very same object, I get SQL query executed twice.
My question is - am I missing something out, or this is an expected behavior? I actually don't want to make additional queries each time I call the same method on this object.
If this is expected - should I use custom getters with member variables which I manually populate and return if present? Or there is something more clever? :)
Update
As from DeBuGGeR's answer - I understand I can use includes when making a query in order to eager load everything, but I simply don't need it, and I can't do it all the time. It's waste of resources and a big overhead if I load my entire DB at the beginning, just to understand (by some criteria) that I won't need it. I want to make additional queries depending on situation. But I also can't afford to destroy all models (DAO objects) that I have and create new ones, with all the info inside them. I should be able to update parts of them, which are missing (from relations).
If you use getUser() it will make the query call, it dosent give you access to the user. You can manually save it to project.user or project.users depending on the association.
But you can try Eager Loading
Project.find({
include: [
{ model: User, as: 'user' } // here you HAVE to specify the same alias as you did in your association
]
}).success(function(project){
project.user // contains the user
});
Also e.g of getUser(). Dont expect it to automatically cache user and dont override this cleverly as it will create side effects. getUser is expected to get from database and it should!
Project.getUser().then(function(user){
// user is available and is a sequelize object
project.user = user; // save project.user and use it till u want to
})
The first part of things is clear - every call to get[Association] (for example Project.getUser()) WILL result in database query.
Sequelize does not maintain any kind of state nor cache for the results. You can get user in the Promisified result of the call, but if you want it again - you will have to make another query.
What #DeBuGGeR said - about using accessors is also not true - accessors are present only immediately after a query, and are not preserved.
As sometimes this is not ok, you have to implement some kind of caching system by yourself. Here comes the tricky part:
IF you want to use the same get method Project.getUser(), you won't be able to do it, as Sequelize overrides your instanceMethods. For example, if you have the association mentioned above, this won't work:
instanceMethods: {
getUser: function() {
// check if you have it, otherwise make a query
}
}
There are few possible ways to fix it - either change Sequelize core a little (to first check if the method exists), or use some kind of wrapper to those functions.
More details about this can be found here: https://github.com/sequelize/sequelize/issues/3707
Thanks to mickhansen for the cooperation on how to understand what to do :)
I'm trying to mask the answer options that show up in a 3DGrid question item in Confirmit, using the value of a background variable.
E.g. when "background1" ==1, display answer category 1. If "background1" ==0, do not display answer category 1. If "background2" ==1, display category 3, otherwise do not. In any case, display answer category 2.
Hopefully this is easy for someone out there (I'm a psychologist, not a coder...so not so much so for me :/)
Thanks!
In order to access the data inside a question/variable we can use the f function of confirmit.
for instance:
f('my_question_id').get();
When masking a question, we need to pass in a Set object so Confirmit knows what Code's to show and not to show.
Often you will mask using a Set from a previous question. So you pass in the question_id and Confirmit does all the other magic.
Here we have the problem of not having a Set, so we will have to create our own.
For this, there are 2 approaches (can be found in the scripting manual under Working with Sets > Methods of the set Object > add and remove and Working with Sets > User defined functions...)
I'm going to stick to the first one because it is easier to use ;)
What we will do first is create a script node (it doesn't matter where you create it, just somewhere in the survey, I often have a folder Functions with all my script nodes in somewhere at the bottom of my survey)
In that script file we will have our function that crates our set:
function CreateMyAwesomeSet()
{
//create an empty Set
var mySet = new Set();
//if background1 equals 1, add 1 to our Set
if ( f('background1').get() == '1' )
{
mySet.add(1);
}
//return the Set of allowed Codes
return mySet;
}
Here we declare a function that we now can use wherever we want to.
So now, If we want to use this Set, we add a Code Mask to your grid:
CreateMyAwesomeSet()
You can ofcourse change the name of the function, and add extra if statements.
hope this helps
I am scraping an 90K record database using JSON-RPC and I am trying to put in some basic error checking. I want to start by scraping the database twice using two different settings and adding a prefix to the second scrape. This way I can check to ensure that the two settings are not producing different records (due to dropped updates, etc). I wanted to implement the comparison using a view which compares each document from the first scrape with it's twin produced by the second scrape and then emit the names of records with a difference between them.
However, I cannot quite figure out how to pull in another doc in the view, everything I have read only discusses external docs using the emit() function, which is too late to permit me to compare it. In the example below, the lookup() function would grab the referenced document.
Is this just not possible?
function(doc) {
if(doc._id.slice(0,1)!=='$' && doc._id.slice(0,1)!== "_"){
var otherDoc = lookup('$test" + doc._id);
if(otherDoc){
var keys = doc.value.keys();
var same = true;
keys.forEach(function(key) {
if ((key.slice(0,1) !== '_') && (key.slice(0,1) !=='$') && (key!=='expires')) {
if (!Object.equal(otherDoc[key], doc[key])) {
same = false;
}
}
});
if(!same){
emit(doc._id, 1);
}
}
}
}
Context
You are correct that this is not possible in CouchDB. The whole point of the map function is that it must be idempotent, otherwise you lose all the other nice benefits of a pre-calculated index.
This is why you cannot access external resources in the map function, whether they be other records or the clock. Any time you run a map you must always get the same result if you put the same record into it. Since there are no relationships between records in CouchDB, you cannot promise that this is possible.
Solution
However, you can still achieve your end goal, just be different means. Some possibilities...
Assuming there is some meaningful numeric value in each doc, you could use a view to take the sum of all those values and group them by which import you did ({key: <batch id>, value: <meaningful number>}). Then compare the two numbers in your client or the browser to see if they match.
A brute force approach would be to use a view to pair the docs that should match. Each doc is on a different row, but they're grouped by a common field. Then iterate through the entire index comparing the pairs. This would certainly be the quickest to code and doesn't depend on your application or data.
Implement a validation function to enforce a schema on your data. Just be warned that this will reduce your write throughput since each written record will be piped out of Erlang and into the JS engine. Also, this is only applicable if you're worried about properly formed records instead of their precise content, which might not be the case.
Instead of your different batch jobs creating different docs, have them place them into the same doc. The structure might look like this: { "_id": "something meaningful", "batch_one": { ..data.. }, "batch_two": { ..data.. } } Then your validation function could compare them or you could create a view that indexes all the docs that don't match. All depends on where in your pipeline you want to do the error checking and correction.
Personally I like the last option better, but only if you don't plan to use the database as is in production. Ie., you wouldn't want to carry around all that extra data in each record.
Hope that helps.
Cheers.