Disclaimer: I jumped to C# 2008 recently and SubSonic 3 (3.0.0.4) at the same time. I haven't used Linq for much of anything in the past.
Is there an easy way to use the foreign key display value for sorting, rather than the FK Id (which is numeric)?
I've added a new Find method in my ActiveRecord.tt to help with sorting based on a string field name but after doing some testing I realized that even though its working as it should be, I am not handling foreign key fields at all (they are just sorting by their value).
Even if I need to change how I am accessing the data it is early enough in the project to do that. Just looking for suggestions.
LINQ is your friend in this situation, you just need to join your two objects and then sort by the property from your foreign object:
var primaryObjectsSorted =
from primaryObjects in PrimaryObject.All()
join foreignObjects in ForeignObject.All()
on primaryObjects.ForeignId equals foreignObjects.Id
orderby foreignObjects.PropertyYouWantToSortOn
select primaryObjects;
So you have table A which has id of table B as a foreign key and you want to sort table A by the DisplayName column of table B rather than the id of table B?
The only way to achive this is by a join.
SELECT tableA.* FROM tableA INNLER JOIN tableB ORDER BY tableB.DisplayName
In SubSonic2 you can do that, and still be able to update your records if you use the DB.Select(...).ExecuteCollection() method.
I think this should be possible with subsonic3, too.
Howevery, if you don't use the foreign key and the display name is unique, you should just use this value as your foreign key.
Related
while designing the datamodel in cassandra. I am stuck while designing the below scenario.
Like One API/Webservice can have multiple parameters(input/output). I don't know the parameters count and its column name as well.
How to design its cassandra datamodel. I am aware that supercolumns are not good to use and alternative good solution is using composite keys. But for my scenario I don't have fixed columns names and count that I can specify as composite keys.
Please see the pic below which I want to model
Secondly how to write its create table statement so that I can specify parameter name as column name.
Please let me know if anything is unclear.
Thanks,
Why not use a map?
http://www.datastax.com/documentation/cql/3.1/cql/cql_using/use_map_t.html
create table foo(
name text,
owner text,
version text,
params map<text, text>,
primary key (name, owner, version)
);
If you're one 2.1, you can create secondary indexes on the map keys / values, which caters to more flexibility if needed.
I'm newbie design cassandra data model and I need some help to think out the box.
Basically I need a hierarchical table, something pretty standard when talking about Employee.
You have a employee, say Big Boss, that have a list of employee under him.
Something like:
create table employee(id timeuuid, name text, employees list<employee>, primary key(id));
So, is there a way to model a hierarchical model in Cassandra adding the table type itself, or even another approach?
When trying this line above it give me
Bad Request: line 1:61 no viable alternative at input 'employee'
EDITED
I was thinking about 2 possibilities:
Add an uuid instead and in my java application find each uuid Employee when bringing up the "boss".
Working with Map, where the uuid is the id itself and my text would be the entire Row, then in my java application get the maps, convert each "text" employee into a Employee entity and finally return the whole object;
It really depends on your queries...one particular model would only be good for a set of queries, but not others.
You can store ids, and look them up again at the client side. This means n extra queries for each "query". This may or may not be a problem, as queries that hit a partition are fast. Using a map from id to name is also an option. This means you do extra work and denormalise the names into the map values. That's also valid. A third option is to use a UDT (user defined type). You could then have a list or set or even map. In cassandra 2.1, you could index the map keys/ values as well, allowing for some quite flexible querying.
https://www.datastax.com/documentation/cql/3.1/cql/cql_using/cqlUseUDT.html
One more approach could be to store a person's details as id, static columns for their attributes, and have "children" as columns in wide row format.
This could look like
create table person(
id int primary key,
name text static,
age int static,
employees map<int, employeeudt>
);
http://www.datastax.com/documentation/cql/3.1/cql/cql_reference/refStaticCol.html
Querying this will give you rows with the static properties repeated, but on disk, it's still held once. You can resolve the rest client side.
Is there any way to select TTL value for an element in a map in Cassandra with CQL3?
I've tried this, but it doesn't work:
SELECT TTL (mapname['element']) FROM columnfamily
Sadly, I'm pretty sure the answer is that it is not possible as of Cassandra 1.2 and CQL3. You can't query individual elements of a collection. As this blog entry says, "You can only retrieve a collection in its entirety". I'd really love to have the capability to query for collection elements, too, though.
You can still set the TTL for individual elements in a collection. I suppose if you wanted to be assured that a TTL is some value for your collection elements, you could read the entire collection and then update the collection (the entire thing or just a chosen few elements) with your desired TTL. Or, if you absolutely needed to know the TTL for individual data, you might just need to change your schema from collections back to good old dynamic columns, for which the TTL query definitely works.
Or, a third possibility could be that you add another column to your schema that holds the TTL of your collection. For example:
CREATE TABLE test (
key text PRIMARY KEY,
data map<text, text>,
data_ttl text
) WITH ...
You could then keep track of the TTL of the entire map column 'data' by always updating column 'data_ttl' whenever you update 'data'. Then, you can query 'data_ttl' just like any other column:
SELECT ttl(data_ttl) FROM test;
I realize none of these solutions are perfect... I'm still trying to figure out what will work best for me, too.
This is the same exact question as this, but instead for EF5.
Is it possible now?
We have a Users table that has an int PK, but in our other tables that have columns like InsertBy/UpdateBy, the desire is to use value of the LANID varchar column from the Users table, rather than the UserID.
No it is still not possible. FK must target PK in the principal table because EF still doesn't support unique keys (prerequisite for using non-PK columns).
I'm trying to set up my postgres schema in yesod. The plan is to let yesod generate the tables, but I'll be inserting new records into the tables from a lua script in a C++ program. I'd like one of the tables to have a primary key based on a unique Int64 that comes from the C++ environment. Can I get Persistent to treat this column as the table key, but without the automatic id generation?
I guess I could have a regular persistent-style record ID column and an Int64 column too but that seems wasteful and overly complicated. The Int64 will always be unique and that's what I'll use to do lookups on the table records to see if they exist already.
I think this question was asked on the mail list. The short answer is no, the primary key in Persistent is auto-increment, but you can have secondary indexes