Filtering by a second column removes the filter from the first column, Ag Grid, Vue. How can it be avoided?
I would like to be able to filter by more than one column.
I am using the server side rendering. I found out the framework code which is responsible for checking if there is a filter applied (and if this code piece tells that a filter is not applied, then the respective filter gets removed):
SetValueModel.prototype.isFilterActive = function () {
return this.filterParams.defaultToNothingSelected ?
this.selectedValues.size > 0 :
this.allValues.length !== this.selectedValues.size;
};
In my case I did not set the defaultToNothingSelected, it is undefined, so it results in a falsy value. But since I update my set filter values after running the filter, the this.allValues.length becomes equal to the this.selectedValues.size, which results in the isFilterActive returning false.
So far the two solutions I see are to either set the defaultToNothingSelected to true or do not remove the available filter values after the filtering was done. I remove them using the api.getFilterInstance(colId).setFilterValues(values).
By removing the filter values I mean the following:
A column has the a, b and c values. I filter by a. Now I set the available filter values to be only a. Probably I should not be doing that.
I still hope to find a cleaner solution, so let the question hang here.
Related
I'm planning to overwrite a Field value using pandas but that does not seem to work. Am i missing anything as part of the code below?
`for row_no in range(df.shape[0]):
rowIndex = df.index[row_no]
if re.search('Fex|Process|PIP|VIP|Generic|Mobility', df.loc[rowIndex].VPC_Sub_Cat, re.I):
print(df.loc[rowIndex].Headline)
print(df.loc[rowIndex].VPC_Sub_Cat)
print(df.loc[rowIndex].Final_Result)
df.loc[rowIndex].Final_Result = 0
print(df.loc[rowIndex].Final_Result)
break`
The output that I get after running this piece of code is:
This is the description of the issue...
VPC-Generic
1
1
Also can i achieve the same thing using a function and applying that on a data frame? kindly let me know.
df.loc[rowIndex].Final_Result is equals to (in most situation though...)
df.loc[rowIndex]['Final_Result']
This will cause a chained assignment (see here #Warning)
Whether a copy or a reference is returned for a setting operation, may depend on the context. This is sometimes called chained assignment and should be avoided. See Returning a View versus Copy.
And then from Returning a view versus a copy
But it turns out that assigning to the product of chained indexing has inherently unpredictable results.
So using df.loc[rowIndex, 'Final_Result'] to make sure that the value you assigned is view, not copy.
I'm tasked with moving some UI-Grids to AG-Grid.
I need to allow the user to use a space delimited string for a column filter so "1 4 23 88" would return all rows where column has 1 or 4 or 23 or 88 as a value.
AG-Grid has the drop down OR option but is added clicks and only allows two values.
With UI-Grid the filter parameter in columnDefs can have a condition:
filter:{condition: filterFunction}
FilterFunction simply has the custom logic and returned true or false.
Is there something similar with AG-Grid? Reading through the docs it seems to get overly involved to create a custom filter. The UI-Grid solution is like 6 lines of code.
CentOS 7, VueJS
I ended up using:
filter:'agTextColumnFilter', filterParams: {textCustomComparator: this.filterFunction}
With filterFunction holding the logic.
https://www.ag-grid.com/javascript-grid/filter-text/#text-custom-comparator
Though I'm using a number column there is not a comparator filterParam for numbers, only 'comparator' for dates and 'textCustomComparator' for text.
This seems to work fine for what I need.
Im trying to create a new column which contains true or false. Basically column A has a number in it, between 1 and 6, if its higher than 3 I want the new column 'match' to contain true, otherwise it contains false. Using the add column based on column in trying the following GREL
if(value > 5, "True", "False")
That basically results in EVERYTHING being false.
I know my IF statement is correct because the following works
if(value.length() > 1, "Double", "Single")
Im just confused why if Value is greater than 5 doesnt work, its obviously missing something but I cant seem to pinpoint it in the docs.
Your GREL if() is correct. Our docs for that are here:
https://github.com/OpenRefine/OpenRefine/wiki/GREL-Controls
But I wonder if you really have all number values in that Column ?
Are all the values "green" color ?
If not, try using Edit Column to Trim Whitespace and then convert the Text to Numbers.
Then try your if() on that column again and see what happens.
I tried to use the Analytik Query step to access some calculated field of the previous row. Turns out that the rows are all calculated in parallel and that accessing the previous row's fields gives you the current value they have during their processing, which is kind of random. It does not seem to be possible to obtain the final value of a field of a previous row. Or is there any other way than the Analytik Query step? I imagine all I need is a checkbox "Wait for previous rows to complete"...
What I need this for: I am processing time dependent data and doing a state recognition. When I am currently in state A, I do other stuff with my data then when I am in state B. So I need to know the state of the previous data row (which is determined not before the end of my transformation).
It can be done is Excel really easy, so I guess there must be some way in PDI. :-)
Thanks for any help!
If i have understood your question correctly, you may try using the Block this step until steps finish. This step waits until all the step copies that are specified in the dialog have finished. Read the link for more.
Hope this helps:)
I believe that it can be resolved by using the User Defined Java Class (UDJC) step.
If you sort the rows before processing them, the Sort By step would wait for the last row set by default.
Here's the most basic example of writing an output row for each input row. One important thing to keep in mind with the User Defined Java Class step, is the fact that they rewrite your whole data set, therefore need to be well thought of, especially if you do look-backs at previous rows. I hope this helps a bit.
// A class member that stores the previous row:
public Object[] previousRow;
public boolean processRow(StepMetaInterface smi, StepDataInterface sdi)
throws KettleException {
// Fetching row:
Object[] r = getRow();
// Check if r is null:
if (r == null) {
setOutputDone();
return false;
}
// Get some field's value:
String someFieldValue = get(Fields.In, "someFieldName").getString(r);
// Log value if you want:
logBasic("current field value is " + someFieldValue);
// Generate an output row object:
Object[] outputRow = RowDataUtil.createResizedCopy(r, data.outputRowMeta.size());
// Modify row's field values if needed:
get(Fields.Out, "someFieldName").setValue(outputRow, "a modified value here");
// Write row:
putRow(data.outputRowMeta, outputRow);
// Assign current row to previous row:
previousRow = r;
return true;
}
EDIT:
One more important thing to note about PDI - the blocking method, either by blocking steps or by the Sort by step, is done by checking row sets rather than single rows.
How can this be verified?
Right click --> Transformation Settings --> Miscellaneous --> Nr of rows in rowset.
The default value is 10000 rows. PDI developers often create a deadlock by using one of the blocking steps with a row set size that doesn't fit their data volume - do keep that in mind.
Use "Identify last row in a stream" & "Filter rows" transformations. The 1st transformation checks if its the last row and returns a Boolean value and the later can be used to filter the records based on the Boolean value returned.
In SQL you can compare a field against a set in the form
[Foo] In {"Bar1", "Bar2", ... , "BarN"}
However I'm having trouble working out how to move a filter expression into something like this. That is, for now, I end up with:
Filter(
[MyHierarchy].[Foo].Members,
[MyHierarchy].CurentMember.Name = "1"
OR [MyHierarchy].CurentMember.Name = "2"
...
OR [MyHierarchy].CurentMember.Name = "N"
)
Since I have 20-30 comparisons, and a moderate chance of the heirarchy name changing, I'd much rather maintain a set and a hierarchy name than a long expression. Is there any way to accomplish this?
Worth bearing in mind that the context is an Excel CubeSet function, so I'm a little limited in terms of defining my own members in the WITH clause.
Assuming you have a set named SelectedMembers, you could use
Intersect([MyHierarchy].[Foo].Members, [SelectedMembers])
You could of course also code this directly, i. e.
Intersect([MyHierarchy].[Foo].Members,
{
[MyHierarchy].[Foo].[1],
[MyHierarchy].[Foo].[2],
...
[MyHierarchy].[Foo].[N]
}
)
But it might be more convenient to have the set already defined in the cube calculation script - if that is possible.