I have an attribute of type pim_catalog_number, but I need to change this to pim_catalog_simpleselect. I cannot change this in Akeneo and if I try to overwrite it by importing a new attributes-file I get the notice that I am not allowed to change the type.
But I have a scenario where I need to do this. So what's the proper way to do this? I can imagine doing some direct SQL queries, but what are the consequences of changing the type directly in the database?
For now the only solution is to export the product values, delete the attribute, create the attribute with the right type and then re-import the products.
We are currently working on a proper solution to do that, but with all the feature of the PIM involved (history, rules, proposals, search, etc) it's not an easy task. We dedicate 1 dev full time on this task for the next three months to come up with a nice solution.
Related
I need to change creation time of a product for my custom logic in my project for the PLP.Is it fine to alter the creation time for a product,via ImpEx?Is it recommended or can it break something else?
Creation Time is initial=true, which means it can be set only once, and only during creation. It can't be edited after that. This value is automatically set by Hybris, and I wouldn't recommend changing it.
Yes you can change it if you use forceWrite=true and use the legacy import mode (it only uses the Jalo layer).
Cf. https://help.hybris.com/1808/hcd/8bef094d86691014a87a93789935b39b.html
However this should only be used for testing purpose. In your project you'll prefer creating a custom attribute to store your own "creation date" if you absolutely need to have logic on this info.
Also, to answer your question, modifying the creation date may impact the cache management. And if you force inconsistent values (creation in the futur or after the modification date for example) you can expect weird results.
Yes, it's not recommended to change it and neither you can change with any modifiers or ImpEx. Still, if you need to change, you can use SQL query to update it directly on database level.
I created a custom Type that has a UserPart attached to it.
According to this issue on GitHub you can't add a CommonPart to content that also has a UserPart because it causes a StackOverflowException but I would still like items of my custom Type to show up in the content list. I already store CreatedUtc and PublishedUtc in the custom PartRecord, can I manually plug these in somewhere?
EDIT: For clarification, my specific scenario is that I am building a public facing Orchard website based on existing data that was used in a private application up to this point. I have a legacy table with user accounts that need to be mapped to Orchard Users but they also represent travel agencies that visitors should be able to browse and that Orchard admins should easily be able to edit and create through the Dashboard. I got the idea to create a TravelAgency type with a UserPart from Sipke's webshop tutorial
Content Types do not require to have a CommonPart to show in the Content List. If i remember properly its done by triggering the Creatable() in your migrations.
Also if you have a UserPart, you could Lazy loaded or just reference it via Foreign Key.
Why would you like something like that to be part of the Content List? I usually keep my business-specific Content Types tucked away in a nice section, so there are easier to visualise and use for users.
There is definitely a bug but as they comment you could extend taxonomies to accomplish your task and keep in mind sometimes changing the Orchard Codebase might fit your purposes, you only have to keep track of your changes when you upgrade next time. I have done it a couple of occasions to fit my projects.
If i remember properly, its been a while.. If you look in the core code where the Content List is created it looks for Creatable() Types. digging even more inside the code, chances are the Query in charge will join the CommonPart, hence your problem. You could easily add another query in the controller and add whatever you are after. The problem though, will be refactoring the rest of actions to accommodate your your type too. Way easier isolating your new Type. had to look at it for you, check this baby: Orchard.Core.Contents.Controllers.AdminController
Which table in Liferay stores the predefined values given for a structure.
Also is there a facility in Liferay to populate these values dynamically using webservices?
The API used to be JournalStructureService, however, as the documentation states, this has been replaced with the Dynamic Data Display API, which, for example, you can find under DDMStructureService in version 6.2.
This gives you a hint where to find the underlying data, however, you don't want to manually write to the database. You do want to use the API to change values. Trust me. Consider the database to be an implementation detail and leave it alone - if nothing else to make your next upgrade experience easier. You should never change any values in the database manually without knowing exactly what you're doing. And, trust me, the keyword here is "exactly", and you'll fail to know all the possible side effects. Don't touch it.
As said #Olaf, depends on Liferay version you will need to use the JournalStructureService or the DDMStructureService. So, if you want to use the Liferay Service by web api you have two options the Axis api where you can obtain WSDL (domain:port/api/axis) or you can use the Json api (domain:port/api/axis). In many cases you are going to need a token to use this services.
Currently, we're running revolution 2.2. On site_content, we have some tags that are ran for crawling twitter. I want to start tracking the number of results for each tag as results come in, to determine which tags don't return that many results, etc.
So I was thinking that I should create a new table (twitter_data), and have a foreign key that will link it to the search tag ID, which is stored in site_content.
What is the best path to accomplish this? Should I create my table then run the reverse schema tool, outlined here?
http://rtfm.modx.com/display/revolution20/Reverse+Engineer+xPDO+Classes+from+Existing+Database+Table#ReverseEngineerxPDOClassesfromExistingDatabaseTable-CreatingaMySQLtable
I also found this, but not sure if this is what I should be looking into:
http://rtfm.modx.com/display/revolution20/Using+Custom+Database+Tables+in+your+3rd+Party+Components
Probably not - if you can avoid modifying the core modx schema do so. an external table may be your best option, but requires a fair bit of work.
though if you can explain wht you mean by 'tags' a little better [html tags? snippets? content tags? not sure what you mean] there may be other options. for example. one of our clients wanted to count page hits [and didn't want to use google to do it] so all we did was to create a template variable bound to each page they wanted to count and then updated that appropriate variable by writing plugin to fire on the onpageload or onpagerender event. [I don't ermember exactly which or what it was called]
Basically, you may be able to do this by writng a plugin rather than trying to extend anything or add snippets/chunks.
I'm doing some work on an existing SharePoint site and part of what I need to do is create a new field on an existing content type.
I'm going to be deploying changes via a feature so I'm debating whether I use CAML to generate the field and then programmatically add it to the existing content type, or whether I can just do it all via the feature receiver.
What would be the best/ cleanest (and most reusable) solution for doing this?
A simple way is to do it in the feature receiver, get a reference to the SPContentType, add the field as XML (SPContentType.Fields.AddFieldAsXml) and then update pushing the changes to child content types
It is really tricky to modify content types on a site that already exists. My preferred method involves having a solution for all the content types and re-deploying that solution when changes are made.
I am going to go on the assumption that by field you mean a new Site Column. In this case I would do it all in the code behind. The amount of code that you need to write to create a site column is rather minimal. You can also attempt to remove the Site Column from any Content Types that are using it if you wish, but this is a task that is quite more involved.
From a reuse perspective if you set-up properties in the feature.xml file you can use those to configure things such as the column name, column type, target content type, etc. and then have a class that can be re-used in the future.
Have you looked at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee537575.aspx, in particular the < AddContentTypeField> tag? That would be a declarative way to do this.