we want to take care that all running busy indicators will be stopped after a couple of time. How can we do that? For the moment we use setBusy(false) for each control.
Thanks a lot!
I think that you should change your overall approach because it's not a good UI/UX pattern.
First of all, why do you have more than one busy control in your view? For instance, you if you are loading record in a list you just set busy the list, not the whole page. If you are submitting a form data, you set busy only the form not everything else.
Second of all, why do you say "For the moment we use setBusy(false) for each control"? You should remove the busy state after a specific event. For istance when you finished to load list's result or you get the result of a form submission.
Anyway, to solve your current issue, the best approach is to use XML binding with a temporary JSON model.
You could have a JSON model like with content like this:
{
busy: false
}
and you bind the busy property of the control to youtJSONModel>/busy at this point when you need to set the control to a busy state you can do this.getView().getModel("youtJSONModel").setProperty("/busy", true); and when you have finished the operation you can do this.getView().getModel("youtJSONModel").setProperty("/busy", false);
Related
I am using ag-grid/ag-grid-angular to provide an editable grid of data backed by a database. When a user edits a cell I want to be able to post the update to the backend service and if the request is successful update the grid and if not undo the user's changes and show an error.
I have approached this problem from a couple different angles but have yet to find the solution that meets all my requirements and am also curious about what the best practice would be to implement this kind of functionality.
My first thought was to leverage the cellValueChanged event. With this approach I can see the old and new values and then make a call to my service to update the database. If the request is successful then everything is great and works as expected. However, if the request fails for some reason then I need to be able to undo the user's changes. Since I have access to the old value I can easily do something like event.node.setDataValue(event.column, event.oldValue) to revert the user's changes. However, since I am updating the grid again this actually triggers the cellValueChanged event a second time. I have no way of knowing that this is the result of undoing the user's changes so I unnecessarily make a call to my service again to update the data even though the original request was never successful in updating the data.
I have also tried using a custom cell editor to get in between when the user is finished editing a cell and when the grid is actually updated. However, it appears that there is no way to integrate an async method in any of these classes to be able to wait for a response from the server to decide whether or not to actually apply the user's changes. E.g.
isCancelBeforeStart(): boolean {
this.service.updateData(event.data).subscribe(() => {
return false;
}, error => {
return true;
});
}
does not work because this method is synchronous and I need to be able to wait for a response from my service before deciding whether to cancel the edit or not.
Is there something I am missing or not taking in to account? Or another way to approach this problem to get my intended functionality? I realize this could be handled much easier with dedicated edit/save buttons but I am ideally looking for an interactive grid that is saving the changes to the backend as the user is making changes and providing feedback in cases where something went wrong.
Any help/feedback is greatly appreciated!
I understand what you are trying to do, and I think that the best approach is going to be to use a "valueSetter" function on each of your editable columns.
With a valueSetter, the grid's value will not be directly updated - you will have to update your bound data to have it reflected in the grid.
When the valueSetter is called by the grid at the end of the edit, you'll probably want to record the original value somehow, update your bound data (so that the grid will reflect the change), and then kick off the back-end save, and return immediately from the valueSetter function.
(It's important to return immediately from the valueSetter function to keep the grid responsive. Since the valueSetter call from the grid is synchronous, if you try to wait for the server response, you're going to lock up the grid while you're waiting.)
Then, if the back-end update succeeds, there's nothing to do, and if it fails, you can update your bound data to reflect the original value.
With this method, you won't have the problem of listening for the cellValueChanged event.
The one issue that you might have to deal with is what to do if the user changes the cell value, and then changes it again before the first back-end save returns.
onCellValueChanged: (event) => {
if (event.oldValue === event.newValue) {
return;
}
try {
// apiUpdate(event.data)
}
catch {
event.node.data[event.colDef.Field] = event.oldValue;
event.node.setDataValue(event.column, event.oldValue);
}
}
By changing the value back on node.data first, when setDataValue() triggers the change event again, oldValue and newValue are actually the same now and the function returns, avoiding the rather slow infinite loop.
I think it's because you change the data behind the scenes directly without agGrid noticing with node.data = , then make a change that agGrid recognises and rerenders the cell by calling setDataValue. Thereby tricking agGrid into behaving.
I would suggest a slightly better approach than StangerString, but to credit him the idea came from his approach. Rather than using a test of the oldValue/newValue and allowing the event to be called twice, you can go around the change detection by doing the following.
event.node.data[event.colDef.field] = event.oldValue;
event.api.refreshCells({ rowNodes: [event.node], columns: [event.column.colId] });
What that does is sets the data directly in the data store used by aggrid, then you tell it to refresh that grid. That will prevent the onCellValueChanged event from having to be called again.
(if you arent using colIds you can use the field or pass the whole column, I think any of them work)
I'm trying to create an agent statechart where a transition should happen every day at 4 pm (except weekends).
I have already tried:
1. a conditional transition (condition: getHourOfDay() == 16)
2: A timeout transition that will "reinsert" my agent into the chart every 1 s and check if time = 16.
My code is still not running, does anyone have any idea how to solve it?
This is my statechart view. Customer is a single resource that is supposed to "get" the products out of my stock everyday at 4pm. It is supposed to happen in the "Active" state.
I have set a timeout transition (from Active-Active) that runs every 1s.
Inside my "Active" state in the "entrance action" i wrote my code to check if it is 4 pm and run my action if so.
I thought since i set a timeout transition it would check my condition every 1s, but apparently it is not working.
Your agent does not enter the Active state via an internal transition.
Redraw the transition to actually go out of the Active state and then enter it again as below:
Don't use condition-based transitions, for performance reasons. In your case, it also never triggers because it is only evaluated when something happens in the model. Incidentally, that is not the case at 4pm.
re your timeout approach: Why would you "reinsert" your agent into its own statechart? Not sure I understand...
Why not set up a schedule or event with your recurrence requirement and make it send a message to the statechart: stateChart.fireEvent("trigger!");. In your statechart, add a message-based transition that waits for this message. This will work.
Be careful to understand the difference between the Statechart.fireEvent() and the Statechart.receiveMessage() functions, though.
PS: and agree with Felipe: please start using SOF the way it is meant, i.e. also mark replies as solved. It helps us but also future users to quickly find solutions :-) cheers
I have a multi-form application in which a child form is positioned on the second monitor on startup, at which time its BoundsRect is saved.
When the computer's display configuration changes, Windows moves the form to the first (primary) monitor. I can catch this change with WM_DISPLAYCHANGE:
procedure WMDisplayChange(var msg: TWMDisplayChange); message WM_DISPLAYCHANGE;
What I'm interested in doing is moving the child form back to the second monitor when it reappears in the configuration (i.e. Screen.MonitorCount goes from 1 to 2), e.g.:
childForm.BoundsRect := childForm.m_WorkingBounds;
// (or)
childForm.BoundsRect := Screen.Monitors[Screen.MonitorCount-1].BoundsRect;
However this assignment is have no affect -- the child form stays on monitor 0.
I've tried other approaches, such as SetWindowPos(), with no success ...
Root of your problem is in the fact that Delphi VCL does not refresh its internal list of monitors when they actually change. You have to force that refresh yourself.
Monitors are refreshed with TScreen.GetMonitors method that is unfortunately private method so you cannot call it directly.
However, TApplication.WndProc(var Message: TMessage) processes WM_WTSSESSION_CHANGE and upon receiving that message it calls Screen.GetMonitors - this is most benign way to achieve your goal.
When you receive notifications that monitors are changed just send it to Application:
SendMessage(Application.Handle, WM_WTSSESSION_CHANGE, 0, 0);
I tested this with old version Delphi5 and it worked easy just to:
Screen.Free;
Screen := TScreen.Create(Nil);
The screen handling has changed in later versions of Delphi, however a similar approach may work.
I need to log trace events during boot so I configure an AutoLogger with all the required providers. But when my service/process starts I want to switch to real-time mode so that the file doesn't explode.
I'm using TraceEvent and I can't figure out how to do this move correctly and atomically.
The first thing I tried:
const int timeToWait = 5000;
using (var tes = new TraceEventSession("TEMPSESSIONNAME", #"c:\temp\TEMPSESSIONNAME.etl") { StopOnDispose = false })
{
tes.EnableProvider(ProviderExtensions.ProviderName<MicrosoftWindowsKernelProcess>());
Thread.Sleep(timeToWait);
}
using (var tes = new TraceEventSession("TEMPSESSIONNAME", TraceEventSessionOptions.Attach))
{
Thread.Sleep(timeToWait);
tes.SetFileName(null);
Thread.Sleep(timeToWait);
Console.WriteLine("Done");
}
Here I wanted to make that I can transfer the session to real-time mode. But instead, the file I got contained events from a 15s period instead of just 10s.
The same happens if I use new TraceEventSession("TEMPSESSIONNAME", #"c:\temp\TEMPSESSIONNAME.etl", TraceEventSessionOptions.Create) instead.
It seems that the following will cause the file to stop being written to:
using (var tes = new TraceEventSession("TEMPSESSIONNAME"))
{
tes.EnableProvider(ProviderExtensions.ProviderName<MicrosoftWindowsKernelProcess>());
Thread.Sleep(timeToWait);
}
But here I must reenable all the providers and according to the documentation "if the session already existed it is closed and reopened (thus orphans are cleaned up on next use)". I don't understand the last part about orphans. Obviously some events might occur in the time between closing, opening and subscribing on the events. Does this mean I will lose these events or will I get the later?
I also found the following in the documentation of the library:
In real time mode, events are buffered and there is at least a second or so delay (typically 3 sec) between the firing of the event and the reception by the session (to allow events to be delivered in efficient clumps of many events)
Does this make the above code alright (well, unless the improbable happens and for some reason my thread is delayed for more than a second between creating the real-time session and starting processing the events)?
I could close the session and create a new different one but then I think I'd miss some events. Or I could open a new session and then close the file-based one but then I might get duplicate events.
I couldn't find online any examples of moving from a file-based trace to a real-time trace.
I managed to contact the author of TraceEvent and this is the answer I got:
Re the exception of the 'auto-closing and restarting' feature, it is really questions about the OS (TraceEvent simply calls the underlying OS API). Just FYI, the deal about orphans is that it is EASY for your process to exit but leave a session going. This MAY be what you want, but often it is not, and so to make the common case 'just work' if you do Create (which is the default), it will close a session if it already existed (since you asked for a new one).
Experimentation of course is the touchstone of 'truth' but I would frankly expecting unusual combinations to just work is generally NOT true.
My recommendation is to keep it simple. You need to open a new session and close the original one. Yes, you will end up with duplicates, but you CAN filter them out (after all they are IDENTICAL timestamps).
The other possibility is use SetFileName in its intended way (from one file to another). This certainly solves your problem of file size growth, and often is a good way to deal with other scenarios (after all you can start up you processing and start deleting files even as new files are being generated).
All,
Is there a way to have a minimum time to keep a stream open before it closes? For some reason, my stream is closing prematurely which is causing errors elsewhere. I need to keep it open to make sure ALL of the data is gathered, and then it can run the other code.
Thanks,
James
In the case that someone falls upon this question later, I ended up creating nested if statements to pull it off.
Basically, there is one statement that checks if the end tag is not found (for my code, the END of the ENTIRE data that I should be receiving is </SessionData> - So, I did if([outputString rangeOfString:#"</SessionData>"].location == NSNotFound). I created a string called totalOutput that would have the outputString added onto the end of totalOutput until the </SessionData> is found.
If anyone ever needs help, just go ahead and comment on here and I can give more information.