I am using the latest ActiveAdmin and I am trying to create a filter for a model that has a belongs_to relationship with another model, and therefor has a column litigation_canonical_docket_event_id that refers to that model.
How can I create a filter that will show only objects that do (or do not) have a value in that ID column?
You can use activeadmin's collection attribute with proc to customize your query. For example:
filter :your_model_field, :collection => proc { YourModel.where("litigation_canonical_docket_event_id IS NOT NULL") }
I ended up creating a standard model scope, then making that scope ransacakable, then referring to it as a filter. The above comment might work if I wanted to find all items that have a specific value but what I am after is finding whether it has any value (or not).
Related
I am a bit confused how to use the component <sw-entity-multi-select>. I understand that the difference between this component and the <sw-entity-multi-id-select> is that the first one returns the entities and the latter one returns just the id of the selected entities. But from the structure and the props they are totally different.
I am confused, because I mainly use the component as this:
<sw-entity-multi-select
entityName="language"
:entity-collection="languages"
:criteria="salesChannelLanguageCriteria"
:label="Language"
#change="selectLanguage"
>
</sw-entity-multi-select>
I could remove the entityName here, as the name is retrieved from the collection as well. But when I dig into the core, I see that inside selectLanguage I should do this:
selectLanguage(languages) {
this.languageIds = languages.getIds();
this.languages = languages;
}
I now understand that languageIds are kind of the v-model that determine, which entities should be selected in the component. Is this true? Why do I have to set the this.languages here again then? To me it's kind of magic if languageIds have this role here, because it's not referenced anywhere on the component. How does it work and how do I tell the component which items are selected - is using languageIds the correct way?
I now understand that languageIds are kind of the v-model that determine, which entities should be selected in the component. Is this true?
No. This example probably just extracts the IDs for some other use, e.g. for adding associations of language to another entity. One could arguably that if this is the only purpose of the selection sw-entity-multi-id-select might be the better component to use.
Why do I have to set the this.languages here again then?
Because you want to store the updated entity collection to persist the selection. Whatever is selected within the multi select is derived from that collection. So, let's say, initially you start out with an empty entity collection. You select some entities and the change is emitted with the updated collection containing the selected entities. Given we have :entity-collection="languages" we then want this.languages to be this updated collection, so the selection persists. So we kinda complete a loop here.
On another note, you could also use the collection with v-model="languages". In that case any additions or removals within the selection would be applied reactively to the collection and you wouldn't need to set this.languages after each change and you could also remove :entity-collection="languages". So basically, which of these approaches you use depends on whether you want your changes applied reactively or not.
I am using the Pimcore API to fetch objects.
$myObjects = new Object\MyObject\Listing();
$myObjects->load();
$myObjects->getObjects();
Works as expected. Now I want to select only a specific field of my objects, e.g. the name field.
How can I tell Pimcore to select only fields that I want? Is it even possibile through the API or do I need to use custom SQL? If so, how can I do that?
Best regards
The pimcore listing is always returning the complete set of objects matching your listing condition...
If you want a fast and easy way to only select one field of your object, I recommend to use the pimcore db class:
$db = \Pimcore\Db::get();
$fieldsArray = $db->fetchCol("SELECT `YOUR_FIELD` FROM `object_query_CLASS-ID`");
This will return you an array width all 'YOUR_FIELD' values from the object query table of your class.
To get the class ID for your query dynamically your should use:
$classId = \Pimcore\Model\Object\MyObject::classId();
Edit:
To get more than one field column, you need to use 'fetchAll' instead of 'fetchCol':
$fieldsArray = $db->fetchAll("SELECT `YOUR_FIELD`, `YOUR_FIELD_2` FROM `object_query_CLASS-ID`");
Quick question.
I have a custom two-option field on an entity, with "Yes"/"No" as the values; "Yes" has the underlying value 1, while "No" has the underlying value 0. I've set the default value for this field to "Yes". However, when I create new entity records, the field always gets the value "No" (0 in the database). It seems to be ignoring the default value I've set. Why?
The field is not present on any of the entity forms, as it's only used in underlying plugin code. Should that matter?
Are you creating a new record for this entity using code that uses the strongly-typed objects? If so, when you create a "new" entity in code, I'm guessing the class itself is setting that field to "false" by default. I don't think those generated classes respect the default values in the metadata. I also think that all fields are submitted on a create when you use these generated classes. That means that your class is setting it to "no" by default and then on create, the system thinks that you explicitly set it to "no" so default values are not applied. I think you need to explicitly remove that attribute from the attribute collection of your entity before you create it. That way the system should respect the default value on create. Sorry for all the "I thinks" but I'm not in a place that I can test or verify all of this. :)
In a JSF page I have to display the data from an entity.
This entity has some int fields which cannot be displayed directly but need to be translated into a descriptive string.
Between them some can have a limited number of values, others have lots of possible values (such as a wordlwide Country_ID) and deserve a table on the Db with the association (ID, description).
This latter case can easily be solved navigating via relationship from the original entity to the entity corresponding to the dictionary table (ID, description) but I don't want to introduce new entities just to solve translations form ID to description.
Besides another integer field has special needs: the hundred thousand number should be changed with a letter according to a rule such as 100015 -> A00015, 301023 -> C01023.
Initially I put the translation code inside the entity itself but I know the great limits and drawbacks of this solution.
Then I created a singletone (EntityTranslator) with all the methods to translate the different fields. For cases where the field values are a lot I put them inside a table which is loaded from the singletone and transformed in a TreeMap, otherwise the descriptions are in arrays inside the class.
In the ManagedBean I wrote a getter for EntityTranslator and inside the jsf I use quite long el statements like the following:
#{myManagedBean.entityTranslator.translateCountryID(myManagedBean.selectedEntity.countryID)}
I think the problem is quite general and I'm looking for a standard way to solve it but, as already stated, I don't want to create new 'stupid' entities only to associate an ID to a description, I think it is overkill.
Another possibility is the use of converters Object(Integer) <-> String but I'm more comfortable in having all the translation needs for an Entity inside the same class.
Your question boils down to the following simple line:
How can I display a field different from id of my entity in my view and how can I morph an integer field into something more meaningful.
The answer is that it depends on a situation.
If you solely want to input/output data, you don't need id at all apart from the possible view parameter like ?id=12345. In this case you can input/output anything you want in your view: the id is always there.
If you want to create a new entity most possibly you have a way of generating ids via JPA, or database, or elsehow besides the direct input from the user. In this situation you don't need to mess with ids as well.
If you want to use information on other entities like show user a dropdown box with e.g. a list of countries, you always have the option to separate label (let it be name) and value (let it be id), or even have a unique not null column containing the country name in your database table that will serve as a natural identifier. If you'd like to get data from the user using an input text field you always can create a converter that will do the job of transforming user input strings to actual entity objects.
Regarding the transformation of your integers, you've actually got several choices: the first one is to attach a converter for these fields that will roughly do 301023 -> C01023 and C01023 -> 301023 transformations, the second one is to write a custom EL function and the third one is to prepare the right model beforehand / do the transformations on-the-fly.
Following on from this question: Referencing parent field on document creation I'm using the formula for the default value for a name field.
IfError(#IfError(#GetDocField($ref;"ProductFamilyManager");
#GetDocField(ParentUNID;"ProductFamilyManager"));
"")
This works when it's a computed field, but not when i change it to be editable with a default value formula.
Any ideas how I can get the field populating with the default value?
The best way of doing this is to use #InheritedDocumentUniqueId. You need to enable inheritance to make that function available, but you don't actually have to inherit any of the parent values.
You should definitely not have to be using two different techniques and #IfError to get this done. And btw: did you know that #IfError is obsolete as of Domino 7?
It may not be supported but just to be sure, has the parent doc been saved before you create the response doc?
Assuming that's not the problem, the alternative is to use the "inherit field values from parent doc " option, which will pass a value from the parent doc to the response doc on creation. I may have the wording wrong but the option is on the form properties dialog in Designer.