I am trying to do some paging together with some fetching, but the result returns duplicates. I have therefore added a AliasToBeanResultTransformer, but then I get the following error:
Could not find a setter for property 'this' in class 'ForumThread'
var crit = Session.CreateCriteria<ForumThread>()
.Add(Expression.Eq("IsActive", true))
.AddOrder(new Order("LastForumPost", false))
.SetFirstResult((page - 1)*pageSize)
.SetMaxResults(pageSize)
.SetFetchMode("ForumPosts", FetchMode.Eager)
.SetFetchMode("ForumTagRelations", FetchMode.Eager)
.SetCacheable(true)
.SetResultTransformer(new NHibernate.Transform.AliasToBeanResultTransformer(typeof (ForumThread)));
return crit.List<ForumThread>();
What might I be missing?
To avoid duplicates you need to use DistinctRootEntityResultTransformer, not AliasToBeanResultTransformer
Related
I have a POJO that has the fields that can be updated. But sometimes only a few fields will need to be updated and the rest are null. How do I write an update statement that ignores the fields that are null? Would it be better to loop through the non missing ones and dynamically add to a set statement, or using coalesce?
I have the following query:
jooqService.using(txn)
.update(USER_DETAILS)
.set(USER_DETAILS.NAME, input.name)
.set(USER_DETAILS.LAST_NAME, input.lastName)
.set(USER_DETAILS.COURSES, input.courses)
.set(USER_DETAILS.SCHOOL, input.school)
.where(USER_DETAILS.ID.eq(input.id))
.execute()
If there is a better practice?
I don't know Jooq but it looks like you could simply do this:
val jooq = jooqService.using(txn).update(USER_DETAILS)
input.name.let {jooq.set(USER_DETAILS.NAME, it)}
input.lastName.let {jooq.set(USER_DETAILS.LAST_NAME, it)}
etc...
EDIT: Mapping these fields explicitly as above is clearest in my opinion, but you could do something like this:
val fields = new Object[] {USER_DETAILS.NAME, USER_DETAILS.LAST_NAME}
val values = new Object[] {input.name, input.lastName}
val jooq = jooqService.using(txn).update(USER_DETAILS)
values.forEachIndexed { i, value ->
value.let {jooq.set(fields[i], value)}
}
You'd still need to enumerate all the fields and values explicitly and consistently in the arrays for this to work. It seems less readable and more error prone to me.
In Java, it would be somthing like this
var jooqQuery = jooqService.using(txn)
.update(USER_DETAILS);
if (input.name != null) {
jooqQuery.set(USER_DETAILS.NAME, input.name);
}
if (input.lastName != null) {
jooqQuery.set(USER_DETAILS.LAST_NAME, input.lastName);
}
// ...
jooqQuery.where(USER_DETAILS.ID.eq(input.id))
.execute();
Another option rather than writing this UPDATE statement is to use UpdatableRecord:
// Load a POJO into a record using a RecordUnmapper
UserDetailsRecord r =
jooqService.using(txn)
.newRecord(USER_DETAILS, input)
(0 .. r.size() - 1).forEach { if (r[it] == null) r.changed(it, false) }
r.update();
You can probably write an extension function to make this available for all jOOQ records, globally, e.g. as r.updateNonNulls().
I'm starting to learn about mongoose/MongoDB aggregation functions, and am having some basic difficulties. For example, I'm trying to do the following:
var myModels= require('./models/myModel');
var myCount = myModels.countDocuments({userID: "A"});
console.log(myCount );
I just want to count the number of documents with userID of "A" but when this prints to the console, it's printing as a whole object, instead of just a numerical count. I've read the answer here but I'm still not able to solve this problem (also, is there a way, unlike in that question, to return the count directly rather than having to predefine a variable and set it in a callback function?)
I'm trying to follow the guide here and don't see where I'm going wrong.
It's because the return value of countDocuments is a promise and not a number.
You either need to wait for that Promise or use callback syntax like so:
var myModels= require('./models/myModel');
// this required the code to be inside an async function
var myCount = await myModels.countDocuments({userID: "A"});
console.log(myCount);
Or:
var myModels= require('./models/myModel');
myModels.countDocuments({userID: "A"})
.then((myCount) =>{console.log(myCount);});
My Linq Query keeps returning the null error on FirstOrDefault
The cast to value type 'System.Int32' failed because the materialized value is null
because it can't find any records to match on the ClinicalAssetID form the ClinicalReading Table, fair enough!
But I want the fields in my details page just to appear blank if the table does not have matching entry.
But how can I handle the null issue when using the order by function ?
Current Code:
var ClinicalASSPATINCVM = (from s in db.ClinicalAssets
join cp in db.ClinicalPATs on s.ClinicalAssetID equals cp.ClinicalAssetID into AP
from subASSPAT in AP.DefaultIfEmpty()
join ci in db.ClinicalINSs on s.ClinicalAssetID equals ci.ClinicalAssetID into AI
from subASSINC in AI.DefaultIfEmpty()
join co in db.ClinicalReadings on s.ClinicalAssetID equals co.ClinicalAssetID into AR
let subASSRED = AR.OrderByDescending(subASSRED => subASSRED.MeterReadingDone).FirstOrDefault()
select new ClinicalASSPATINCVM
{
ClinicalAssetID = s.ClinicalAssetID,
AssetTypeName = s.AssetTypeName,
ProductName = s.ProductName,
ModelName = s.ModelName,
SupplierName = s.SupplierName,
ManufacturerName = s.ManufacturerName,
SerialNo = s.SerialNo,
PurchaseDate = s.PurchaseDate,
PoNo = s.PoNo,
Costing = s.Costing,
TeamName = s.TeamName,
StaffName = s.StaffName,
WarrantyEndDate = subASSPAT.WarrantyEndDate,
InspectionDate = subASSPAT.InspectionDate,
InspectionOutcomeResult = subASSPAT.InspectionOutcomeResult,
InspectionDocumnets = subASSPAT.InspectionDocumnets,
LastTypeofInspection = subASSINC.LastTypeofInspection,
NextInspectionDate = subASSINC.NextInspectionDate,
NextInspectionType = subASSINC.NextInspectionType,
MeterReadingDone = subASSRED.MeterReadingDone,
MeterReadingDue = subASSRED.MeterReadingDue,
MeterReading = subASSRED.MeterReading,
MeterUnitsUsed = subASSRED.MeterUnitsUsed,
FilterReplaced = subASSRED.FilterReplaced
}).FirstOrDefault(x => x.ClinicalAssetID == id);
Tried this but doesn't work
.DefaultIfEmpty(new ClinicalASSPATINCVM())
.FirstOrDefault()
Error was:
CS1929 'IOrderedEnumerable<ClinicalReading>' does not contain a definition for 'DefaultIfEmpty' and the best extension method overload 'Queryable.DefaultIfEmpty<ClinicalASSPATINCVM>(IQueryable<ClinicalASSPATINCVM>, ClinicalASSPATINCVM)' requires a receiver of type 'IQueryable<ClinicalASSPATINCVM>'
Feel a little closer with this but still errors
let subASSRED = AR.OrderByDescending(subASSRED => (subASSRED.MeterReadingDone != null) ? subASSRED.MeterReadingDone : String.Empty).FirstOrDefault()
Error:
CS0173 Type of conditional expression cannot be determined because there is no implicit conversion between 'System.DateTime?' and 'string'
The original error means that some of the following properties of the ClinicalASSPATINCVM class - MeterReadingDone, MeterReadingDue, MeterReading, MeterUnitsUsed, or FilterReplaced is of type int.
Remember that subASSRED here
let subASSRED = AR.OrderByDescending(subASSRED => subASSRED.MeterReadingDone).FirstOrDefault()
might be null (no corresponding record).
Now look at this part of the projection:
MeterReadingDone = subASSRED.MeterReadingDone,
MeterReadingDue = subASSRED.MeterReadingDue,
MeterReading = subASSRED.MeterReading,
MeterUnitsUsed = subASSRED.MeterUnitsUsed,
FilterReplaced = subASSRED.FilterReplaced
If that was LINQ to Objects, all these would generate NRE (Null Reference Exception) at runtime. In LINQ to Entities this is converted and executed as SQL. SQL has no issues with expression like subASSRED.SomeProperty because SQL supports NULL naturally even if SomeProperty normally does not allow NULL. So the SQL query executes normally, but now EF must materialize the result into objects, and the C# object property is not nullable, hence the error in question.
To solve it, find the int property(es) and use the following pattern inside query:
SomeIntProperty = (int?)subASSRED.SomeIntProperty ?? 0 // or other meaningful default
or change receiving object property type to int? and leave the original query as is.
Do the same for any non nullable type property, e.g. DateTime, double, decimal, Guid etc.
You're problem is because your DefaultIfEmpty is executed AsQueryable. Perform it AsEnumerable and it will work:
// create the default element only once!
static readonly ClinicalAssPatInVcm defaultElement = new ClinicalAssPatInVcm ();
var result = <my big linq query>
.Where(x => x.ClinicalAssetID == id)
.AsEnumerable()
.DefaultIfEmpty(defaultElement)
.FirstOrDefault();
This won't lead to a performance penalty!
Database management systems are extremely optimized for selecting data. One of the slower parts of a database query is the transport of the selected data to your local process. Hence it is wise to let the DBMS do most of the selecting, and only after you know that you only have the data that you really plan to use, move the data to your local process.
In your case, you need at utmost one element from your DBMS, and if there is nothing, you want to use a default object instead.
AsQueryable will move the selected data to your local process in a smart way, probably per "page" of selected data.
The page size is a good compromise: not too small, so you don't have to ask for the next page too often; not too large, so that you don't transfer much more items than you actually use.
Besides, because of the Where statement you expect at utmost one element anyway. So that a full "page" is fetched is no problem, the page will contain only one element.
After the page is fetched, DefaultIfEmpty checks if the page is empty, and if so, returns a sequence containing the defaultElement. If not, it returns the complete page.
After the DefaultIfEmpty you only take the first element, which is what you want.
For some reason I am unable to use Select() after a Skip()/Take() unless I do this in a certain way. The following code works and allows me to use result as part of a sub query.
var query = QueryOver.Of<MyType>();
query.Skip(1);
var result = query.Select(myType => myType.Id);
However, if I attempt to create the query on one line as below I can't compile.
var query = QueryOver.Of<MyType>().Skip(1);
var result = query.Select(myType => myType.Id);
It looks like the code in the first results in query being of type QueryOver< MyType, MyType> while the second results in query being of type QueryOver< MyType>.
It also works if written like this.
var query = QueryOver.Of<MyType>().Select(myType => myType.Id).Skip(1);
Any ideas why the second version fails horribly when the first and third versions work? It seems like odd behavior.
You have a typo in the second version...
var query = QueryOver.Of<MyType().Skip(1);
is missing the >
var query = QueryOver.Of<MyType>().Skip(1);
Not sure if thats what you where looking for.
In WordPress as you must already known, when using get_posts() or query_posts() or even WP_Query, it is not possible to order the returned posts by specifying a list of post ID in the order we want.
Instead we have to loop through the results and re-order them on the PHP side. This is a performance hit and a bad practice. Instead we should use built-in MySQL functions to retrieve the posts in the desired order upfront.
Thankfully there is the posts_orderby which can be used to specify a custom ORDERBY statement, like this:
// My list of post IDs in my custom order
$my_post_ids = array(1,3,2);
// Apply filter to the ORDERBY SQL statement
add_filter('posts_orderby', 'my_custom_orderby');
function my_custom_orderby($orderby_statement) {
global $my_post_ids;
$orderby_statement = 'FIELD(ID, '.implode(',',$my_post_ids).')';
return $orderby_statement;
}
// My custom query
$my_custom_query = new WP_Query(array('post_type' => 'post', 'post__in' => $my_post_ids);
However there is a problem with the above code, is that it will affect the order of all queries on the page! Including queries made by plugins, shortcodes, and so on.
Easy fix!
The simple way to fix this, is to apply the filter only one time, and remove it as soon as it is called, by putting a remove_filter() within the filter itself, so it is run only once:
// My list of post IDs in my custom order
$my_post_ids = array(1,3,2);
// Apply filter to the ORDERBY SQL statement
add_filter('posts_orderby', 'my_custom_orderby');
function my_custom_orderby($orderby_statement) {
// Disable this filter for future queries!
remove_filter(current_filter(), __FUNCTION__);
global $my_post_ids;
$orderby_statement = 'FIELD(ID, '.implode(',',$my_post_ids).')';
return $orderby_statement;
}
// My custom query
$my_custom_query = new WP_Query(array('post_type' => 'post', 'post__in' => $my_post_ids);
Because I set this filter just before my custom query, once I execute my custom query it should be filtered by the posts_orderby filter set above, which is then immediately disabled so it won't affect any future queries.
In theory, that's great, and it works great in most case scenarios!
An issue with WPML
However I have encountered a case when using the WPML plugin where this filter affects other queries than mine and causes errors. I believe the WPML plugin is creating a query of its own that is executed just before my own custom query, making my filter applies to the WPML query instead of mine!
Is there any possible way to add a check within the filter to make sure that it affects the correct query?
Thank you very much
Edit:
The fix for WPML
For information, while the accepted answer for this question is correct, it didn't solve the problem I was having with WPML. Here is how I fixed the WPML conflict:
// My list of post IDs in my custom order
$my_post_ids = array(1,3,2);
// Apply filter to the ORDERBY SQL statement
add_filter('posts_orderby', 'my_custom_orderby');
function my_custom_orderby($orderby_statement) {
// Disable this filter for future queries!
remove_filter(current_filter(), __FUNCTION__);
global $my_post_ids, $wpdb;
$orderby_statement = 'FIELD('.$wpdb->base_prefix.'posts.ID, '.implode(',',$my_post_ids).')';
return $orderby_statement;
}
// My custom query
$my_custom_query = new WP_Query(array('post_type' => 'post', 'post__in' => $my_post_ids);
This filter takes two parameters, $orderby and &$this. "this" being the WP_Query object. I'm not sure how to detect that WPML is making the call, but we can check that your call is the one being
made.
$my_post_ids = array(1,3,2);
add_filter( 'posts_orderby', 'my_custom_orderby', 10, 2 );
function my_custom_orderby( $orderby_statement, $object )
{
global $my_post_ids;
if( $my_post_ids != $object->query['post__in'] )
return $orderby_statement;
// Disable this filter for future queries!
remove_filter( current_filter(), __FUNCTION__ );
$orderby_statement = 'FIELD(ID, ' . implode( ',', $my_post_ids ) . ')';
return $orderby_statement;
}