How to run seeders with relations and UUID - eloquent

I'm busy on a project for internships now and I'm stuck at this one.
I can already generate uuid's with multiple seeders at once, but the problem is that I need generated uuid's in a couple of seeders because there are tables who needs to be related with each other by the uuid's...
So how can I fix this problem?
Thanks in advance!

For foreing keys, I used Faker's randomElement method inside factories:
use App\Models\Article;
use App\Models\Visibility;
use Webpatser\Uuid\Uuid;
use Faker\Generator as Faker;
$factory->define(Article::class, function (Faker $faker) {
return [
'id' => Uuid::generate()->string,
'visibility_id' => $faker->randomElement(Visibility::all()->toArray())['id'],
];
});
Hope It's what your looking for!

Related

Code First TVF in 6.1.0-alpha1-30113

EF People,
My understanding is that the newly made public APIs for metadata will allow us to add enough metadata in to the model so that TVF can be called and be composable.
If anyone can point me in the right direction I would greatly appreciate it. Without Composable TVF I have to jump through some major work a rounds.
From looking at the unit test it looks like something a long this line of thought:
var functionImport = EdmFunction.Create()
"Foo", "Bar", DataSpace.CSpace,
new EdmFunctionPayload
{
IsComposable = true,
IsFunctionImport = true,
ReturnParameters = new[]
{
FunctionParameter.Create("functionname", EdmType.GetBuiltInType()
EdmConstants.ReturnType,
TypeUsage.Create(collectionTypeMock.Object),
ParameterMode.ReturnValue),
}
});
...
entityContainer.AddFunctionImport(functionImport);
Thanks,
Brian F
Yes, it is now possible in EF6.1. I actually created a custom model convention which allows using store functions in CodeFirst using the newly opened mapping API. The convention is available on NuGet http://www.nuget.org/packages/EntityFramework.CodeFirstStoreFunctions. Here is the link to the blogpost containing all the details: http://blog.3d-logic.com/2014/04/09/support-for-store-functions-tvfs-and-stored-procs-in-entity-framework-6-1/. The project is open source and you can get sources here: https://codefirstfunctions.codeplex.com/

Django Tastypie, Remove Elements From ManyToMany Fields

I am using Tastypie, Django for my project.
To Update a many to many field I have used save_m2m hook.
def save_m2m(self, bundle):
for field_name, field_object in self.fields.items():
if not getattr(field_object, 'is_m2m', False):
continue
if not field_object.attribute:
continue
if field_object.readonly:
continue
related_mngr = getattr(bundle.obj, field_object.attribute)
related_objs = []
print bundle.data[field_name]
for related_bundle in bundle.data[field_name]:
try:
stock = Stock.objects.get(nse_symbol = related_bundle.obj.nse_symbol)
print stock.__dict__
except Stock.DoesNotExist as e:
dataa = {"error_message": e}
raise ImmediateHttpResponse(response=HttpBadRequest(content=json.dumps(dataa), content_type="application/json; charset=UTF-8"))
related_objs.append(stock)
related_mngr.add(*related_objs)
Now I want to remove elements from the same many to many field.
How should I achieve this. Do I have to send a patch request or delete request and how to handle this.
I am begineer in tastypie. I googled it some time and I couldn't find a proper way. Please guide me how to complete this.
Thanks.
I've thought a lot about handing m2m relationships, since most of our app depends on m2m links.
I've settled for the approach of an update method. Pass in the all the references of the relationships you want changed (add and remove), then update the db accordingly. We only pass in the changed values, since if you have a paginated list, you only want to update the items the user has identified. Generally I use a custom hook for this defined in override_urls.
I used to have a separate add and remove method, which worked well until we changed the gui and allowed users simply to change checkboxes. In that approach having an update method was much more useful. You'll have to decide on which method suits your application the best.

Prevent form manipulation in Lithium/mongoDB

I'm writing my first community page with Lithium and mongoDB. I really like the schema-less way of mongo, but there is one problem making it impossible working without a schema:
For instance we have a simple form like this:
<?=$this->form->create();?>
<?=$this->form->field('name',array('label' => 'Topic title'));?>
<?=$this->form->field('text',array('label' => 'Content'));?>
<?=$this->form->submit('create');?>
which will be even simpler saved by this:
if($this->request->is('post')) {
$board_post = BoardPosts::create($this->request->data);
$board_post->save();
}
Now it's possible for everyone to add some form inputs by DOM manipulation with Firebug, Developer Tools etc. Of course that it might be some sensless fields in the database, but maybe someone adds a field, that is really used.
The only way to prevent this, is creating a schema in model. But for me this makes the whole idea of a schema-less database useless, doesn't it? And how to make schemas for different situations/actions, when some fields must not occur?
The Model::save() method accepts a 'whitelist' param in its options. See http://li3.me/docs/lithium/data/Model::save()
$whitelist = array(
'title',
'text'
);
$post = BoardPosts::create();
$post->save($this->request->data, compact('whitelist'));
You can also define protected $_schema in your Model and set protected $_meta = array('locked' => true); which will automatically set the whitelist to the fields defined in your schema. However, it is a good idea to define the whitelist in your controller to avoid attacks like you describe.
This problem is called a mass-assignment vulnerability and exists in many frameworks if developers are not careful.

GWT Editor Framework: Drop Down List

I'm looking for someone to point me in the right direction (link) or provide a code example for implementing a drop down list for a many-to-one relationship using RequestFactory and the Editor framework in GWT. One of the models for my project has a many to one relationship:
#Entity
public class Book {
#ManyToOne
private Author author;
}
When I build the view to add/edit a book, I want to show a drop down list that can be used to choose which author wrote the book. How can this be done with the Editor framework?
For the drop-down list, you need a ValueListBox<AuthorProxy>, and it happens to be an editor of AuthorProxy, so all is well. But you then need to populate the list (setAcceptableValues), so you'll likely have to make a request to your server to load the list of authors.
Beware the setAcceptableValues automatically adds the current value (returned by getValue, and defaults to null) to the list (and setValue automatically adds the value to the list of acceptable values too if needed), so make sure you pass null as an acceptable value, or you call setValue with a value from the list before calling setAcceptableValues.
I know it's an old question but here's my two cents anyway.
I had some trouble with a similar scenario. The problem is that the acceptable values (AuthorProxy instances) were retrieved in a RequestContext different than the one the BookEditor used to edit a BookProxy.
The result is that the current AuthorProxy was always repeated in the ValueListBoxwhen I tried to edit a BookProxy object. After some research I found this post in the GWT Google group, where Thomas explained that
"EntityProxy#equals() actually compares their request-context and stableId()."
So, as I could not change my editing workflow, I chose to change the way the ValueListBox handled its values by setting a custom ProvidesKey that used a different object field in its comparison process.
My final solution is similar to this:
#UiFactory
#Ignore
ValueListBox<AuthorProxy> createValueListBox ()
{
return new ValueListBox<AuthorProxy>(new Renderer<AuthorProxy>()
{
...
}, new ProvidesKey<AuthorProxy>()
{
#Override
public Object getKey (AuthorProxy author)
{
return (author != null && author.getId() != null) ? author.getId() : Long.MIN_VALUE;
}
});
}
This solution seems ok to me. I hope it helps someone else.

How do I use add_to in Class::DBI?

I'm trying to use Class::DBI with a simple one parent -> may chidren relationships:
Data::Company->table('Companies');
Data::Company->columns(All => qw/CompanyId Name Url/);
Data::Company->has_many(offers => 'Data::Offer'=>'CompanyId'); # =>'CompanyId'
and
Data::Offer->table('Offers');
Data::Offer->columns(All => qw/OfferId CompanyId MonthlyPrice/);
Data::Offer->has_a(company => 'Data::Company'=>'CompanyId');
I try to add a new record:
my $company = Data::Company->insert({ Name => 'Test', Url => 'http://url' });
my $offer = $company->add_to_offers({ MonthlyPrice => 100 });
But I get:
Can't locate object method "add_to_offers" via package "Data::Company"
I looked at the classical Music::CD example, but I cannot figure out what I am doing wrong.
I agree with Manni, if your package declarations are in the same file, then you need to have the class with the has_a() relationship defined first. Otherwise, if they are in different source files, then the documentation states:
Class::DBI should usually be able to
do the right things, as long as all
classes inherit Class::DBI before
'use'ing any other classes.
As to the three-argument form, you are doing it properly. The third arg for has_many() is the column in the foreign class which is a foreign key to this class. That is, Offer has a CompanyId which points to Company's CompanyId.
Thank you
Well, the issue was actually not my code, but my set up. I realized that this morning after powering on my computer:
* Apache + mod_perl on the server
* SMB mount
When I made changes to several files, not all changes seems to be loaded by mod_perl. Restarting Apache solves the issue. I've actually seen this kind of issue in the past where the client and SMB server's time are out of sync.
The code above works fine with 1 file for each module.
Thank you
I really haven't got much experience with Class:DBI, but I'll give this a shot anyway:
The documentation states that: "the class with the has_a() must be defined earlier than the class with the has_many()".
I cannot find any reference to the way you are using has_a and has_many with three arguments which is always 'CompanyId' in your case.