I need some help sorting out some syntax for an update to a list item in sharepoint from an application. Here's a rundown on the situation :
There are two lists within this sp site. One list is a products list, and the second list is a pricing. The way these lists are setup however are a 1 to many scheme. One product can have many pricing records. The product then has a column against it that is a look up field that supports multiple values.
Using REST and oData I can query and get the pricing information easily enough now, but my problem is when I need to update the products record to add a price.
with regular lookup fields I normally just set the ID property for the object, then call the update and savechanges methods for that list. With the pricing column however supporting multiple records there is no ID to set, and the field is an array of sorts. Adding the pricing object (list item) and updating and savechanges doesn't actually save. No errors are thrown but the then when viewing the list it isn't actually saving.
How can I add a price lookup to my Product?
I wrote a small method to query through each price and add it's initial price to the product below for testing :
InventoryCatalogDataContext dc = new InventoryCatalogDataContext(_pushinTinSvc);
dc.Credentials = CredentialCache.DefaultCredentials;
List<PricingItem> pricing = (from q in dc.Pricing
select q).ToList<PricingItem>();
foreach (PricingItem price in pricing)
{
var query = (DataServiceQuery<ProductsItem>)
dc.Products
.Expand("Pricing")
.Where(p => p.Id.Equals(price.StockCodeId));
List<ProductsItem> prods = query.ToList<ProductsItem>();
ProductsItem product = prods[0];
product.Pricing.Add(price);
dc.UpdateObject(product);
}
try
{
dc.SaveChanges();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
string stopHere = ex.Message;
}
I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong or if this is a bug. If I inspect the item after the SaveChanges, the item still has the pricing item lookup attached, showing a count of 1. At the end of the code block, if I re-query for the product, at that point it even still has the pricing attached. But once the method finishes and returns to the UI, the pricing is no longer attached, the fields are empty when you look at the list in sharepoint, but the version does increment. So I'm a little lost...
Related
I am trying to create a formula to obtain a list of items that have no open transactions.
I cant just filter out by status as this filters out transactions that are open, as opposed to showing me only items with nothing open.
So basically if an item has anything open then i dont want it on the search. I do need it on the search if it has all closed or it has no transactions at all.
Hoping someone can help put me in the right direction.
I am a little bit stuck at where to start with the formulas and tried a case formula.
You can use item saved search adding under criteria as "Transaction Fields-status-anyOf-select all closed/rejected/declined statuses" not in filter reason of saved search.
Thanks.
To get the value of non transaction items as well, You need to check the check box use expression under criteria in standard subtab use parens() with OR expression.
And add one more condition as "Transaction Fields-Internal Id-anyOf-none with
"Transaction Fields-status-anyOf-select all closed/rejected/declined statuses".
Add both condition with OR logic.
It will work for both items condition if it has transaction status with closed or with none of transaction internal ids.
Thanks.
I think this is possible in a saved search, and requires a change in the way the filtering is done. Rather than filtering on the "Filters", using grouping and summary calculations to determine if an item qualifies, basically :
Create the item saved search as you would normally, but don't include a "Standard" filter for the openness of the transaction.
In the results, group by item name (or internalid), and another fields you want to include in the top-level results.
In the Criteria - Summary list, add a Formula (Number) condition :
Summary Type= Sum (Count won't work here)
Formula = case when {transaction.status} = 'Open' then 1 else 0 end
Equal to 0
Whether this is more or less elegant than bknight's answer is debatable.
I don't think this is the sort of thing you can do with a single saved search.
It would be fairly easy to do with SuiteQL though.
The script below runs in the console and finds items that are not on any Pending Billing Sales Orders. It's adapted from a script with a different purpose but illustrates the concept.
You can get a list of the status values to use by creating a saved search that finds all the transactions with open statuses you want to exclude , take note of that saved search's id and running the second script in the console
require(['N/query'], query => {
const sqlStr = `
select item.id, itemid, count(po.tranid) as po, count(bill.tranId) as bill, max(bill.tranDate) as lastBilled, count(sale.tranId) as sales, count(tran.tranId) as trans
from item
left outer join transactionLine as line
on line.item = item.id
left outer join transaction as tran on line.transaction = tran.id
left outer join transaction as po on line.transaction = po.id and po.type = 'PurchOrd'
left outer join transaction as bill on line.transaction = bill.id and bill.type = 'VendBill'
left outer join transaction as sale on line.transaction = sale.id and sale.type in ('CustInvc', 'CashSale')
where item.id not in (select otl.item from transactionLine otl, transaction ot where
otl.transaction = ot.id and ot.status in ('SalesOrd:F'))
group by item.id, item.itemid
`;
console.log(sqlStr);
console.log(query.runSuiteQL({
query: sqlStr
}).asMappedResults().map((r, idx)=>{
if(!idx) console.log(JSON.stringify(r));
return `${r.id}\t${r.itemid}\t${r.po}\t${r.bill}\t${r.lastBilled}\t${r.sales}\t${r.trans}`;
}).join('\n'));
});
require(['N/search'], search=>{
const filters = search.load({id:304}).filters;
console.log(JSON.stringify(filters.find(f=>f.name == 'status'), null, ' '));
});
In terms of doing something with this you could run this in a saved search and email someone the results, show the results in a workbook in SuiteAnalytics or build a portlet to display the results - for this last Tim Dietrich has a nice write up on portlets and SuiteQL
I have created a custom table and made it available on the Customers screen called 'Serial Tracking'. The purpose of this screen is to track serialised items that each customer is in possession of (regardless of who the item was purchased from).
I would like a record automatically added to the table on shipment release. I have attempted to customise the Release method of SoShipmentEntry but am having trouble getting all the required data together as well as the best way to structure the code.
The custom table DAC is
AUSerialTrack
Not necessarily the answer to your question but to long for a comment.
As an alternative, what if you set your Serials tab view to the Ship Line Split table without dealing with a custom table. You could get the information you needed with something like this: (need to convert to your BQL view for your serials tab)
SELECT [ship].[CustomerID],
[ship].[ShipmentNbr],
[split].[InventoryID],
[split].[LotSerialNbr]
FROM [dbo].[SOShipLineSplit] split
INNER JOIN [dbo].[SOShipLine] line
ON [line].[CompanyID] = [split].[CompanyID]
AND [line].[ShipmentNbr] = [split].[ShipmentNbr]
AND [line].[LineNbr] = [split].[LineNbr]
INNER JOIN [dbo].[SOShipment] ship
ON [ship].[CompanyID] = [split].[CompanyID]
AND [ship].[ShipmentNbr] = [split].[ShipmentNbr]
INNER JOIN [dbo].[InventoryItem] i
ON [i].[CompanyID] = [split].[CompanyID]
AND [i].[InventoryID] = [split].[InventoryID]
INNER JOIN [dbo].[INLotSerClass] c
ON [c].[CompanyID] = [i].[CompanyID]
AND [c].[LotSerClassID] = [i].[LotSerClassID]
WHERE [c].[LotSerTrack] = 'S'
AND [ship].[Confirmed] = 1;
Then when the user goes to the tab its always the current results. No custom code to fill in a custom table so easier for upgrades/customization maintenance.
I seem to be stuck on a classic ORM issue and don't know really how to handle it, so at this point any help is welcome.
Is there a way to get the pivot table on a hasManyThrough query? Better yet, apply some filter or sort to it. A typical example
Table products
id,title
Table categories
id,title
table products_categories
productsId, categoriesId, orderBy, main
So, in the above scenario, say you want to get all categories of product X that are (main = true) or you want to sort the the product categories by orderBy.
What happens now is a first SELECT on products to get the product data, a second SELECT on products_categories to get the categoriesId and a final SELECT on categories to get the actual categories. Ideally, filters and sort should be applied to the 2nd SELECT like
SELECT `id`,`productsId`,`categoriesId`,`orderBy`,`main` FROM `products_categories` WHERE `productsId` IN (180) WHERE main = 1 ORDER BY `orderBy` DESC
Another typical example would be wanting to order the product images based on the order the user wants them to
so you would have a products_images table
id,image,productsID,orderBy
and you would want to
SELECT from products_images WHERE productsId In (180) ORDER BY orderBy ASC
Is that even possible?
EDIT : Here is the relationship needed for an intermediate table to get what I need based on my schema.
Products.hasMany(Images,
{
as: "Images",
"foreignKey": "productsId",
"through": ProductsImagesItems,
scope: function (inst, filter) {
return {active: 1};
}
});
Thing is the scope function is giving me access to the final result and not to the intermediate table.
I am not sure to fully understand your problem(s), but for sure you need to move away from the table concept and express your problem in terms of Models and Relations.
The way I see it, you have two models Product(properties: title) and Category (properties: main).
Then, you can have relations between the two, potentially
Product belongsTo Category
Category hasMany Product
This means a product will belong to a single category, while a category may contain many products. There are other relations available
Then, using the generated REST API, you can filter GET requests to get items in function of their properties (like main in your case), or use custom GET requests (automatically generated when you add relations) to get for instance all products belonging to a specific category.
Does this helps ?
Based on what you have here I'd probably recommend using the scope option when defining the relationship. The LoopBack docs show a very similar example of the "product - category" scenario:
Product.hasMany(Category, {
as: 'categories',
scope: function(instance, filter) {
return { type: instance.type };
}
});
In the example above, instance is a category that is being matched, and each product would have a new categories property that would contain the matching Category entities for that Product. Note that this does not follow your exact data scheme, so you may need to play around with it. Also, I think your API query would have to specify that you want the categories related data loaded (those are not included by default):
/api/Products/13?filter{"include":["categories"]}
I suggest you define a custom / remote method in Product.js that does the work for you.
Product.getCategories(_productId){
// if you are taking product title as param instead of _productId,
// you will first need to find product ID
// then execute a find query on products_categories with
// 1. where filter to get only main categoris and productId = _productId
// 2. include filter to include product and category objects
// 3. orderBy filter to sort items based on orderBy column
// now you will get an array of products_categories.
// Each item / object in the array will have nested objects of Product and Category.
}
I have a Paginated List displayed on the visual force page and in the backend I was using a StandardSetController to control the pagination. However, one column on the table is an aggregated field whose calculation is done in a wrapper class. Recently, I want to sort the paginated list against the calculated field. And unfortunately the calculated result cannot be done on the data model(SObject) level.
So I am thinking to passed a sorted list of SObject to the StandardSetController constructor. That is to sort the record before it has been pass into the StandardSetController.
The code is like below:
List<Job__c> jobs = new List<Job__c>();
List<Job__c> tempJobs = Database.Query(basicQuery + filterExpression);
//sort with values
List<JobWrapper> jws = createJobWrappers(tempJobs);
JobWrapper.sortBy = JobWrapper.SORTBY_CALCULATEDFIELD_ASC;
jws.sort();
for(JobWrapper jw : jws){
jobs.add(jw.JobRecord);
}
jobs = jobs.deepClone(true, true, true);
StandardSetController con = new ApexPages.StandardSetController(jobs);
con.setPageSize(10);
However after executing the last line system throw exception:Modified rows exist in the records collection!
I did not modify any rows in the controller. Could anyone help me understanding the exception?
I have a list that looks like:
Movie Year
----- ----
Fight Club 1999
The Matrix 1999
Pulp Fiction 1994
Using CAML and the SPQuery object I need to get a distinct list of items from the Year column which will populate a drop down control.
Searching around there doesn't appear to be a way of doing this within the CAML query. I'm wondering how people have gone about achieving this?
Another way to do this is to use DataView.ToTable-Method - its first parameter is the one that makes the list distinct.
SPList movies = SPContext.Current.Web.Lists["Movies"];
SPQuery query = new SPQuery();
query.Query = "<OrderBy><FieldRef Name='Year' /></OrderBy>";
DataTable tempTbl = movies.GetItems(query).GetDataTable();
DataView v = new DataView(tempTbl);
String[] columns = {"Year"};
DataTable tbl = v.ToTable(true, columns);
You can then proceed using the DataTable tbl.
If you want to bind the distinct results to a DataSource of for example a Repeater and retain the actual item via the ItemDataBound events' e.Item.DataItem method, the DataTable way is not going to work. Instead, and besides also when not wanting to bind it to a DataSource, you could also use Linq to define the distinct values.
// Retrieve the list. NEVER use the Web.Lists["Movies"] option as in the other examples as this will enumerate every list in your SPWeb and may cause serious performance issues
var list = SPContext.Current.Web.Lists.TryGetList("Movies");
// Make sure the list was successfully retrieved
if(list == null) return;
// Retrieve all items in the list
var items = list.GetItems();
// Filter the items in the results to only retain distinct items in an 2D array
var distinctItems = (from SPListItem item in items select item["Year"]).Distinct().ToArray()
// Bind results to the repeater
Repeater.DataSource = distinctItems;
Repeater.DataBind();
Remember that since there is no CAML support for distinct queries, each sample provided on this page will retrieve ALL items from the SPList. This may be fine for smaller lists, but for lists with thousands of listitems, this will seriously be a performance killer. Unfortunately there is no more optimized way of achieving the same.
There is no DISTINCT in CAML to populate your dropdown try using something like:
foreach (SPListItem listItem in listItems)
{
if ( null == ddlYear.Items.FindByText(listItem["Year"].ToString()) )
{
ListItem ThisItem = new ListItem();
ThisItem.Text = listItem["Year"].ToString();
ThisItem.Value = listItem["Year"].ToString();
ddlYear.Items.Add(ThisItem);
}
}
Assumes your dropdown is called ddlYear.
Can you switch from SPQuery to SPSiteDataQuery? You should be able to, without any problems.
After that, you can use standard ado.net behaviour:
SPSiteDataQuery query = new SPSiteDataQuery();
/// ... populate your query here. Make sure you add Year to the ViewFields.
DataTable table = SPContext.Current.Web.GetSiteData(query);
//create a new dataview for our table
DataView view = new DataView(table);
//and finally create a new datatable with unique values on the columns specified
DataTable tableUnique = view.ToTable(true, "Year");
After coming across post after post about how this was impossible, I've finally found a way. This has been tested in SharePoint Online. Here's a function that will get you all unique values for a column. It just requires you to pass in the list Id, View Id, internal list name, and a callback function.
function getUniqueColumnValues(listid, viewid, column, _callback){
var uniqueVals = [];
$.ajax({
url: _spPageContextInfo.webAbsoluteUrl + "/_layouts/15/filter.aspx?ListId={" + listid + "}&FieldInternalName=" + column + "&ViewId={" + viewid + "}&FilterOnly=1&Filter=1",
method: "GET",
headers: { "Accept": "application/json; odata=verbose" }
}).then(function(response) {
$(response).find('OPTION').each(function(a,b){
if ($(b)[0].value) {
uniqueVals.push($(b)[0].value);
}
});
_callback(true,uniqueVals);
},function(){
_callback(false,"Error retrieving unique column values");
});
}
I was considering this problem earlier today, and the best solution I could think of uses the following algorithm (sorry, no code at the moment):
L is a list of known values (starts populated with the static Choice options when querying fill-in options, for example)
X is approximately the number of possible options
1. Create a query that excludes the items in L
1. Use the query to fetch X items from list (ordered as randomly as possible)
2. Add unique items to L
3. Repeat 1 - 3 until number of fetched items < X
This would reduce the total number of items returned significantly, at the cost of making more queries.
It doesn't much matter if X is entirely accurate, but the randomness is quite important. Essentially the first query is likely to include the most common options, so the second query will exclude these and is likely to include the next most common options and so on through the iterations.
In the best case, the first query includes all the options, then the second query will be empty. (X items retrieved in total, over 2 queries)
In the worst case (e.g. the query is ordered by the options we're looking for, and there are more than X items with each option) we'll make as many queries as there are options. Returning approximately X * X items in total.