During dehydration I create a custom value:
def dehydrate(self, bundle):
bundle.data['custom_field'] = ["add lots of stuff and return an int"]
return bundle
that I would like to filter on.
/?format=json&custom_field__gt=0...
however I get an error that the "[custom_field] field has no 'attribute' for searching with."
Maybe I'm misunderstanding custom filters, but in both build_filters and apply_filters I can't seem to get access to my custom field to filter on it. On the examples I've seen, it seems like I'd have to redo all the work done in dehydrate in build_filters, e.g.
for all the items:
item['custom_field'] = ["add lots of stuff and return an int"]
filter on item and add to pk_list
orm_filters["pk__in"] = [i.pk for i in pk_list]
which seems wrong, as I'm doing the work twice. What am I missing?
The problem is that dehydration is "per object" by design, while filters are per object_list. That's why you will have to filter it manually and redo work in dehydration.
You can imagine it like this:
# Whole table
[obj, obj1, obj2, obj3, obj4, obj5, obj5]
# filter operations
[...]
# After filtering
[obj1, obj3, obj6]
# Returning
[dehydrate(obj), dehydrate(obj3), dehydrate(obj5)]
In addition you can imagine if you fetch by filtering and you get let say 100 objects. It would be quite inefficient to trigger dehydrate on whole table for instance 100000 records.
And maybe creating new column in model could be candidate solution if you plan to use a lot of filters, ordering etc. I guess its kind of statistic information in this field so if not new column then maybe django aggregation could ease your pain a little.
Related
I am working on refactoring code for a Spark job written in Scala. We have a dataset of rolled up data, "rollups", that we pass through a list of rules. Each of the rollups has a "flags" value that is a list that we appended the rule information to to keep track of which "rule" was triggered by that rollup. Each rule is an object that will look at the data of a rollup and decide whether or not to add its identifying information to the rollups "flags".
So here is where the problem is. Currently each rule takes in the rollup data, adds a flag and then returns it again.
object Rule_1 extends AnomalyRule {
override def identifyAnomalies(rollupData: RollupData): RollupData = {
if (*condition on rollup data is triggered*) {
rollupData.flags = rollupData.addFlag("rule 1")
}
rollupData
}
}
This allows us to calculate the rules like:
val anomalyInfo = rollups.flatMap(x =>
AnomalyRules.rules.map(y =>
y.identifyAnomalies(x)
).filter(a => a.flags.nonEmpty)
)
# do later processing on anomalyInfo
The rollups val here is a Dataset of our rollup data and rules is a list of rule objects.
The issue with this method is that it will create a duplicate rollups for each rule. For example if we have 7 rules, each rollup will be duplicated 7 times because each rule returns the rollup passed into it. Running dropDuplicates() on the dataset will take care of this issue but its ugly and confusing.
This is why I wanted to refactor, but if I set up the rules to instead only append the rule like this:
object Rule_1 extends AnomalyRule {
override def identifyAnomalies(rollupData: RollupData): Unit= {
if (*condition on rollup data is triggered*) {
rollupData.flags = rollupData.addFlag("rule 1")
}
}
}
We can instead write
rollups.foreach(rollup =>
AnomalyRules.rules.foreach(rule =>
rule.identifyAnomalies(rollup)
)
)
# do later processing on rollups
This seems like the more intuitive approach. However, while running these rules in unit tests works fine, no "flag" information is added when the "rollups" dataset is passed through. I think it is because datasets are not mutable? This method actually does work if I collect the rollups as a list but the dataset I am testing on is much smaller than what is in production so we can't do that. This is where I am stuck and can not think of a cleaner way of writing this code. I feel like I am missing some fundamental programming concept or do not know how mutability works well enough.
In order to retrieve a contact, having a cell phone number of 09362724853, I use following code:
$newSMS_contact = new Contact;
$newSMS_contact->retrieve_by_string_fields(array('phone_mobile'=>'09362724853'));
How about retrieving a contact having a cell phone number of 09362724853 OR 9362724853 OR +989362724853 with sugar internal functions?
This doesn't work:
$newSMS_contact = new Contact;
$newSMS_contact->retrieve_by_string_fields(array('phone_mobile'=>'09362724853', 'phone_mobile'=>'9362724853', 'phone_mobile'=>'+989362724853'));
The thing is that the function which you are trying to utilize was created for other goals. Since it fetches only one row from DB and fills a Bean with it, the Array of parameters will be turned into a string separated by AND operators. But you have completely different case.
I would suggest to use another approach, which is less convenient but more reliable:
$contact_bean = new Contact();
$contacts_list = $contact_bean->get_full_list(null, '(phone_mobile = "09362724853" OR phone_mobile = "9362724853" OR phone_mobile = "+989362724853")');
Eventually, you will have an array of beans.
Probably, for some modules, you will need to use table aliases for fields definition into SQL supplement.
If I were you, I'd have strict rules when the phone numbers are put in the system so you can be sure your phone numbers follow a certain format in the database. (Something like E.164: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.164) You can enforce the rules with a custom SugarField (or override one that exists) that has Javascript and Server-side validation.
This way, you won't have to worry about that logic in this piece of the code or anywhere else you want to deal with phone numbers.
I have the following Problem, given this XML Datastructure:
<level1>
<level2ElementTypeA></level2ElementTypeA>
<level2ElementTypeB>
<level3ElementTypeA>String1Ineed<level3ElementTypeB>
</level2ElementTypeB>
...
<level2ElementTypeC>
<level3ElementTypeB attribute1>
<level4ElementTypeA>String2Ineed<level4ElementTypeA>
<level3ElementTypeB>
<level2ElementTypeC>
...
<level2ElementTypeD></level2ElementTypeD>
</level1>
<level1>...</level1>
I need to create an Entity which contain: String1Ineed and String2Ineed.
So every time I came across a level3ElementTypeB with a certain value in attribute1, I have my String2Ineed. The ugly part is how to obtain String1Ineed, which is located in the first element of type level2ElementTypeB above the current level2ElementTypeC.
My 'imperative' solution looks like that that I always keep an variable with the last value of String1Ineed and if I hit criteria for String2Ineed, I simply use that. If we look at this from a plain collection processing point of view. How would you model the backtracking logic between String1Ineed and String2Ineed? Using the State Monad?
Isn't this what XPATH is for? You can find String2Ineed and then change the axis to search back for String1Ineed.
I've searched around the web for a way to achieve this, and found multiple solutions. Most of them had messy code, all of them drawbacks. Some ideas involved setting default values of all the db fields based on a record. Others worked by appending multiple SQLFORMs, which resulted in differences in indentation on the page (because it's 2 HTML tables in 1 form).
I'm looking for a compact and elegant way of providing a read-only representation of a record based on a join on two tables. Surely there must be some simple way to achieve this, right? The Web2py book only contains an example of an insert-form. It's this kind of neat solution I am looking for.
In the future I will probably need multi-table forms that provide update functionality as well, but for now I'll be happy if I can get a simple read-only form for a record.
I would greatly appreciate any suggestions.
This seems to work for me:
def test():
fields = [db.tableA[field] for field in db.tableA.keys() \
if type(db.tableA[field]) == type(db.tableA.some_field)]
fields += [db.tableB[field] for field in db.tableB.keys() \
if type(db.tableB[field]) == type(db.tableB.some_field)]
ff = []
for field in fields:
ff.append(Field(field.name, field.type))
form = SQLFORM.factory(*ff, readonly=True)
return dict(form=form)
You could add in field.required, field.requires validtaors, etc. And also, since you're using SQLFORM.factory, you should be able to validate it and to updates/inserts. Just make sure that the form you are building using this method contains all of the necessary information to validate the form for update -- I believe you can add them easily to the Field instantiation above.
EDIT: Oh yeah, and you need to get the values of the record in question to pre-populate the form based on a record id (after form is defined)... also.. I just realized that instead of those list comprehensions, you can just use SQLFORM.factory and provide the two tables:
def test():
form = SQLFORM.factory(db.tableA, db.tableB, readonly=True)
record = ... (query for your record, probably based on an id in request.args(0))
for field in record.keys():
if (*test if this really is a field*):
form.vars[field] = record[field]
return dict(form=form)
Some tweaking will be required since I only provided psuedo-code for the pre-population... but look at: http://web2py.com/books/default/chapter/29/7#Pre-populating-the-form and the SQLFORM/SQLFORM.factory sections.
I'm using Symfony 1.2 with Doctrine. I have a Place model with translations in two languages. This Place model has also a nested set behaviour.
I'm having problems now creating a new place that belongs to another node. I've tried two options but both of them fail:
1 option
$this->mergeForm(new PlaceTranslationForm($this->object->Translation[$lang->getCurrentCulture()]));
If I merge the form, what happens is that the value of the place_id field id an array. I suppose is because it is waiting a real object with an id. If I try to set place_id='' there is another error.
2 option
$this->mergeI18n(array($lang->getCurrentCulture()));
public function mergeI18n($cultures, $decorator = null)
{
if (!$this->isI18n())
{
throw new sfException(sprintf('The model "%s" is not internationalized.', $this->getModelName()));
}
$class = $this->getI18nFormClass();
foreach ($cultures as $culture)
{
$i18nObject = $this->object->Translation[$culture];
$i18n = new $class($i18nObject);
unset($i18n['id']);
$i18n->widgetSchema['lang'] = new sfWidgetFormInputHidden();
$this->mergeForm($i18n); // pass $culture too
}
}
Now the error is:
Couldn't hydrate. Found non-unique key mapping named 'lang'.
Looking at the sql, the id is not defined; so it can't be a duplicate record (I have a unique key (id, lang))
Any idea of what can be happening?
thanks!
It looks like the issues you are having are related to embedding forms within each other, which can be tricky. You will likely need to do things in the updateObject/bind methods of the parent form to get it to pass its values correctly to its child forms.
This article is worth a read:
http://www.blogs.uni-osnabrueck.de/rotapken/2009/03/13/symfony-merge-embedded-form/comment-page-1/
It gives some good info on how embedding (and mergeing) forms work. The technique the article uses will probably work for you, but I've not used I18n in sf before, so it may well be that there is a more elegant solution built in?