Play Scala Anorm dynamic SQL for UPDATE query - scala

My Google-fu is letting me down, so I'm hoping you can help
I'm building some webservices is the play framework using scala and anorm for database access
One of my calls is to update an existing row in a database - i.e run a query like
UPDATE [Clerks]
SET [firstName] = {firstName}
,[lastName] = {lastName}
,[login] = {login}
,[password] = {password}
WHERE [id] = {id}
My method receives a clerk object BUT all the parameters are optional (except the id of course) as they may only wish to update a single column of the row like so
UPDATE [Clerks]
SET [firstName] = {firstName}
WHERE [id] = {id}
So I want the method to check which clerk params are defined and build the 'SET' part of the update statement accordingly
It seems like there should be a better way than to go through each param of the clerk object, check if it is defined and build the query string - but I've been unable to find anything on the topic so far.
Does anyone have any suggestions how this is best handled

As the commenters mentioned it appears to not be possible - you must build the query string yourself.
I found that examples around this lacking and it took more time to resolve this than it should have (I'm new to scala and the play framework, so this has been a common theme)
in the end this is what I implemented:
override def updateClerk(clerk: Clerk) = {
var setString: String = "[modified] = {modified}"
var params: collection.mutable.Seq[NamedParameter] =
collection.mutable.Seq(
NamedParameter("modified", toParameterValue(System.currentTimeMillis / 1000)),
NamedParameter("id", toParameterValue(clerk.id.get)))
if (clerk.firstName.isDefined) {
setString += ", [firstName] = {firstName}"
params = params :+ NamedParameter("firstName", toParameterValue(clerk.firstName.getOrElse("")))
}
if (clerk.lastName.isDefined) {
setString += ", [lastName] = {lastName}"
params = params :+ NamedParameter("lastName", toParameterValue(clerk.lastName.getOrElse("")))
}
if (clerk.login.isDefined) {
setString += ", [login] = {login}"
params = params :+ NamedParameter("login", toParameterValue(clerk.login.getOrElse("")))
}
if (clerk.password.isDefined) {
setString += ", [password] = {password}"
params = params :+ NamedParameter("password", toParameterValue(clerk.password.getOrElse("")))
}
if (clerk.supervisor.isDefined) {
setString += ", [isSupervisor] = {supervisor}"
params = params :+ NamedParameter("supervisor", toParameterValue(clerk.supervisor.getOrElse(false)))
}
val result = DB.withConnection { implicit c =>
SQL("UPDATE [Clerks] SET " + setString + " WHERE [id] = {id}").on(params:_*).executeUpdate()
}
}
it likely isn't the best way to do this, however I found it quite readable and the parameters are properly handled in the prepared statement.
Hopefully this can benefit someone running into a similar issue
If anyone wants to offer up improvements, they'd be gratefully received

Since roughly 2.6.0 this is possible directly with anorm using their macros, http://playframework.github.io/anorm/#generated-parameter-conversions
Here is my example:
case class UpdateLeagueFormInput(transferLimit: Option[Int], transferWildcard: Option[Boolean], transferOpen: Option[Boolean])
val input = UpdateLeagueFormInput(None, None, Some(true))
val toParams: ToParameterList[UpdateLeagueFormInput] = Macro.toParameters[UpdateLeagueFormInput]
val params = toParams(input)
val dynamicUpdates = params.map(p => {
val snakeName = camelToSnake(p.name)
s"$snakeName = CASE WHEN {${p.name}} IS NULL THEN l.$snakeName ELSE {${p.name}} END"
})
val generatedStmt = s"""UPDATE league l set ${dynamicUpdates.mkString(", ")} where league_id = ${league.leagueId}"""
SQL(generatedStmt).on(params: _*).executeUpdate()
producing:
UPDATE league l set transfer_limit = CASE WHEN null IS NULL THEN l.transfer_limit ELSE null END, transfer_wildcard = CASE WHEN null IS NULL THEN l.transfer_wildcard ELSE null END, transfer_open = CASE WHEN true IS NULL THEN l.transfer_open ELSE true END where league_id = 26;
Notes:
The camelToSnake function is just my own (There is an obvious ColumnNaming.SnakeCase available for parser rows, but I couldn't find something similar for parameter parsing)
My example string interpolates {league.leagueId}, when it could treat this as a parameter as well
Would be nice to avoid the redundant sets for null fields, however I don't think it's possible, and in my opinion clean code/messy auto-generated sql > messy code/clean auto-generated sql

Related

Only update values if they are not null in Koltin

So i try to only update values if they are not null in the response body of my request. This is how it looks at the moment, and if i dont send all the values with it, they just get nulled in the database. Im using Kotlin with JpaRepositories.
#PutMapping(value = ["/patient"], produces = ["application/json"])
fun updateClient(#RequestBody client: Client): ResponseEntity<Client>{
val old = repository.findById(client.id).orElseThrow{ NotFoundException("no patient found for id "+ client.id) }
val new = old.copy(lastName= client.lastName, firstName = client.firstName,
birthDate = client.birthDate, insuranceNumber = client.insuranceNumber)
return ResponseEntity(repository.save(new), HttpStatus.OK)
}
This is how the model class looks like
#Entity
data class Client(
#Id
val id: String,
val lastName: String?,
val firstName: String?,
val birthDate: Date?,
val insuranceNumber: Int?
)
Is there a easier way then writing copy once for every value and checking if its not null before?
The only thing that comes to mind that might make the process easier without modifying the current model or having to create other helper model/functions would be to use the elvis operator.
val new = old.copy(
lastName = client.lastName ?: old.lastName,
firstName = client.firstName ?: old.firstName,
birthDate = client.birthDate ?: old.birthDate,
insuranceNumber = client.insuranceNumber ?: old.insuranceNumber
)
Other ways of doing this would be to create our own copy function that would ignore input nulls, or a custom constructor that does the same. But that would require more work, and it depends on the model if that makes sense or not, for the example model that would not make sense in my opinion, it would be overkill

SLICK: To insert value in 3 different tables using one slick api call

The question is related to slick:
I have three tables:
1) Users
2)Team2members
3)Team2Owners
In my post request to users, I am passing values of memberOf and managerOf, these values will be inserted in the tables Team2members and Team2Owners respectively and not in Users table. Though other values of the post request will be inserted in 'Users' table.
My Post request looks like below:
{"kind": "via#user",
"userReference":{"userId":"priya16"},
"user":"preferredNameSpecialChar#domain1.com","memberOf":{"teamReference":{"organizationId":"airtel","teamId":"supportteam"}},
"managerOf":{"teamReference":{"organizationId":"airtel","teamId":"supportteam"}},
"firstName":"Special_fn1",
"lastName":"specialChar_ln1",
"preferredName":[{"locale":"employee1","value":"##$%^&*(Z0FH"}],
"description":" preferredNameSpecialChar test "}
I am forming the query which is shown below:
The query seems to work fine when only memberInsert is defined, when I try to define both the values i.e.memberInsert and managerInsert then insertion happens only for second value.
val query = config.api.customerTableDBIO(apiRequest.parameters.organizationId).flatMap { tables =>
val userInsert = tables.Users returning tables.Users += empRow
val memberInsert = inputObject.memberOf.map(m => m.copy(teamReference = m.teamReference.copy(organizationId = apiRequest.parameters.organizationId))).map { r =>
for {
team2MemberRow <- tables.Team2members returning tables.Team2members += Teams2MembersEntity.fromEmtToTeams2Members(r, empRow.id)
team <- tables.Teams.filter(_.id === r.teamReference.teamId.toLowerCase).map(_.friendlyName).result.headOption
} yield (team2MemberRow, team)
}
val managerInsert = inputObject.managerOf.map(m => m.copy(teamReference = m.teamReference.copy(organizationId = apiRequest.parameters.organizationId))).map { r =>
for {
team2OwnerRow <- tables.Team2owners returning tables.Team2owners += Teams2OwnersEntity.fromEmtToTeam2owners(r, empRow.id)
team <- tables.Teams.filter(_.id === r.teamReference.teamId.toLowerCase).map(_.friendlyName).result.headOption
} yield (team2OwnerRow, team)
}
userInsert.flatMap { userRow =>
val user = UserEntity.fromDbEntity(userRow)
if (memberInsert.isDefined) memberInsert.get
.map(r => user.copy(memberOf = Some(Teams2MembersEntity.fromEmtToMemberRef(r._1, r._2.map(TeamEntity.toApiFriendlyName).getOrElse(List.empty)))))
else DBIO.successful(user)
if (managerInsert.isDefined) managerInsert.get
.map(r => user.copy(managerOf = Some(Teams2OwnersEntity.fromEmtToManagerRef(r._1, r._2.map(TeamEntity.toApiFriendlyName).getOrElse(List.empty)))))
else DBIO.successful(user)
}
}
The query seems to work fine when only memberInsert is defined, when I try to define both the values i.e.memberInsert and managerInsert then insertion happens only for second value.
The problem looks to be with the final call to flatMap.
That should return a DBIO[T]. However, your expression generates a DBIO[T] in various branches, but only one value will be returned from flatMap. That would explain why you don't see all the actions being run.
Instead, what you could do is assign each step to a value and sequence them. There are lots of ways you could do that, such as using DBIO.seq or andThen.
Here's a sketch of one approach that might work for you....
val maybeInsertMemeber: Option[DBIO[User]] =
member.map( your code for constructing an action here )
val maybeInsertManager Option[DBIO[User]] =
manager.map( your code for constructing an action here )
DBIO.sequenceOption(maybeInsertMember) andThen
DBIO.sequenceOption(maybeInsertManager) andThen
DBIO.successful(user)
The result of that expression is a DBIO[User] which combines three queries together.

Converting Imperative Expressions to Functional style paradigm

I have the following Scala snippet from my code. I am not able to convert it into functional style. I could do it at other places in my code but not able to change the below one to functional. Issue is once the code exhausts all pattern matching options, then only it should send back "NA". Following code is doing that, but it's not in functional style (for-yield)
var matches = new ListBuffer[List[String]]()
for (line <- caselist){
var count = 0
for (pat <- pattern if (!pat.findAllIn(line).isEmpty)){
count += 1
matches += pat.findAllIn(line).toList
}
if (count == 0){
matches += List("NA")
}
}
return matches.toList
}
Your question is not entirely complete, so I can't be sure, but I believe the following will do the job:
for {
line <- caselist
matches = pattern.map(_.findAllIn(line).toList)
} yield matches.flatten match {
case Nil => List("NA")
case ms => ms
}
This should do the job. Using foreach and filter to generate the matches and checking to make sure there is a match for each line will work.
caseList.foreach{ line =>
val results = pattern.foreach ( pat => pat.findAllIn(line).toList )
val filteredResults = results.filter( ! _.isEmpty )
if ( filteredResults.isEmpty ) List("NA")
else filteredResults
}
Functional doesn't mean you can't have intermediate named values.

Specify Variable Initialization Order in Scala

I have a special class Model that needs to have its methods called in a very specific order.
I tried doing something like this:
val model = new Model
new MyWrappingClass {
val first = model.firstMethod()
val second = model.secondMethod()
val third = model.thirdMethod()
}
The methods should be called in the order listed, however I am seeing an apparently random order.
Is there any way to get the variable initialization methods to be called in a particular order?
I doubt your methods are called in the wrong order. But to be sure, you can try something like this:
val (first, second, third) = (
model.firstMethod(),
model.secondMethod(),
model.thirdMethod()
)
You likely have some other problem with your code.
I can run 100 million loops where it never gets the order wrong, as follows:
class Model {
var done = Array(false,false,false);
def firstMethod():Boolean = { done(0) = true; done(1) || done(2) };
def secondMethod():Boolean = { done(1) = true; !done(0) || done(2) };
def thirdMethod():Boolean = { done(2) = true; !done(0) || !done(1) };
};
Notice that these methods return a True if done out of order and false when called in order.
Here's your class:
class MyWrappingClass {
val model = new Model;
val first = model.firstMethod()
val second = model.secondMethod()
val third = model.thirdMethod()
};
Our function to check for bad behavior on each trial:
def isNaughty(w: MyWrappingClass):Boolean = { w.first || w.second || w.third };
A short program to test:
var i = 0
var b = false;
while( (i<100000000) && !b ){
b = isNaughty(new MyWrappingClass);
i += 1;
}
if (b){
println("out-of-order behavior occurred");
println(i);
} else {
println("looks good");
}
Scala 2.11.7 on OpenJDK8 / Ubuntu 15.04
Of course this doesn't prove it impossible to have wrong order, only that correct behavior seems highly repeatable in a fairly simple case.

MongoDB - combining multiple Numeric Range queries (C# driver)

*Mongo Newbie here
I have a document containing several hundred numeric fields which I need to query in combination.
var collection = _myDB.GetCollection<MyDocument>("collection");
IMongoQuery mongoQuery; // = Query.GT("field", value1).LT(value2);
foreach (MyObject queryObj in Queries)
{
// I have several hundred fields such as Height, that are in queryObj
// how do I build a "boolean" query in C#
mongoQuery = Query.GTE("Height", Convert.ToInt16(queryObj.Height * lowerbound));
}
I have several hundred fields such as Height (e.g. Width, Area, Perimeter etc.), that are in queryObj how do I build a "boolean" query in C# that combines range queries for each field in conjunction.
I have tried to use the example Query.GT("field", value1).LT(value2);, however the compiler does not accept the LT(Value) construct. In any event I need to be able to build a complex boolean query by looping through each of the numeric field values.
Thanks for helping a newbie out.
EDIT 3:
Ok, it looks like you already have code in place to build the complicated query. In that case, you just needed to fix the compiler issue. Am assuming you want to do the following (x > 20 && x < 40) && (y > 30 && y < 50) ...
var collection = _myDB.GetCollection<MyDocument>("collection");
var queries = new List<IMongoQuery>();
foreach (MyObject queryObj in Queries)
{
//I have several hundred fields such as Height, that are in queryObj
//how do I build a "boolean" query in C#
var lowerBoundQuery = Query.GTE("Height", Convert.ToInt16(queryObj.Height * lowerbound));
var upperBoundQuery = Query.LTE("Height", Convert.ToInt16(queryObj.Height * upperbound));
var query = Query.And(lowerBoundQuery, upperBoundQuery);
queries.Add(query);
}
var finalQuery = Query.And(queries);
/*
if you want to instead do an OR,
var finalQuery = Query.Or(queries);
*/
Original Answer.
var list = _myDb.GetCollection<MyDoc>("CollectionName")
.AsQueryable<MyDoc>()
.Where(x =>
x.Height > 20 &&
x.Height < 40)
.ToList();
I have tried to use the example Query.GT("field", value1).LT(value2);,
however the compiler does not accept the LT(Value) construct.
You can query MongoDB using linq, if you are using the official C# driver. That ought to solve the compiler issue I think.
The more interesting question I have in mind is, how are you going to construct that complicated boolean query?
One option is to dynamically build an Expression and then pass that to the Where
My colleague is using the following code for something similar...
public static IQueryable<T> Where<T>(this IQueryable<T> query,
string column, object value, WhereOperation operation)
{
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(column))
return query;
ParameterExpression parameter = Expression.Parameter(query.ElementType, "p");
MemberExpression memberAccess = null;
foreach (var property in column.Split('.'))
memberAccess = MemberExpression.Property
(memberAccess ?? (parameter as Expression), property);
//change param value type
//necessary to getting bool from string
ConstantExpression filter = Expression.Constant
(
Convert.ChangeType(value, memberAccess.Type)
);
//switch operation
Expression condition = null;
LambdaExpression lambda = null;
switch (operation)
{
//equal ==
case WhereOperation.Equal:
condition = Expression.Equal(memberAccess, filter);
lambda = Expression.Lambda(condition, parameter);
break;
//not equal !=
case WhereOperation.NotEqual:
condition = Expression.NotEqual(memberAccess, filter);
lambda = Expression.Lambda(condition, parameter);
break;
//string.Contains()
case WhereOperation.Contains:
condition = Expression.Call(memberAccess,
typeof(string).GetMethod("Contains"),
Expression.Constant(value));
lambda = Expression.Lambda(condition, parameter);
break;
}
MethodCallExpression result = Expression.Call(
typeof(Queryable), "Where",
new[] { query.ElementType },
query.Expression,
lambda);
return query.Provider.CreateQuery<T>(result);
}
public enum WhereOperation
{
Equal,
NotEqual,
Contains
}
Currently it only supports == && !=, but it shouldn't be that difficult to implement >= or <= ...
You could get some hints from the Expression class: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.linq.expressions.expression.aspx
EDIT:
var props = ["Height", "Weight", "Age"];
var query = _myDb.GetCollection<MyDoc>("CName").AsQueryable<MyDoc>();
foreach (var prop in props)
{
query = query.Where(prop, GetLowerLimit(queryObj, prop), WhereOperation.Between, GetUpperLimit(queryObj, prop));
}
// the above query when iterated over, will result in a where clause that joins each individual `prop\condition` with an `AND`.
// The code above will not compile. The `Where` function I wrote doesnt accept 4 parameters. You will need to implement the logic for that yourself. Though it ought to be straight forward I think...
EDIT 2:
If you don't want to use linq, you can still use Mongo Query. You will just need to craft your queries using the Query.And() and Query.Or().
// I think this might be deprecated. Please refer the release notes for the C# driver version 1.5.0
Query.And(Query.GTE("Salary", new BsonDouble(20)), Query.LTE("Salary", new BsonDouble(40)), Query.GTE("Height", new BsonDouble(20)), Query.LTE("Height", new BsonDouble(40)))
// strongly typed version
new QueryBuilder<Employee>().And(Query<Employee>.GTE(x => x.Salary, 40), Query<Employee>.LTE(x => x.Salary, 60), Query<Employee>.GTE(x => x.HourlyRateToClients, 40), Query<Employee>.LTE(x => x.HourlyRateToClients, 60))