I'm trying to create a ranking where the projects entity can receive votes, represented by another table, the votes entity. However, when no one voted for project x, the entity votes does not know about the specific project. I'm using ORM Sequelize and I'm using SUM/GROUPBY method to join common records. When there are records, everything goes well. The problem is when there is no vote registered for a given project in the vote table, my wish is that this project without votes, would also be returned with a default value of 0. I've read that it has a default value like "isnull(sum, 0)", something like that, but I don't know where to put it, because in my head the votes entity will have to go back to the projects entity to check which ones didn't add up, so I don't know if it fits in my case.
let response = await Votes.findAll({
limit,
offset,
attributes: ['project', [sequelize.fn('sum', sequelize.col('factor')), 'votes']],
group: ['project', "project_.address" ],
include: [
{
model: Projects,
as: 'project_',
attributes: ["address","name"],
}],
raw: true,
order: [[sequelize.literal('votes'), 'DESC']],
})
return res.json(response);
Related
I'm using KeystoneJS v6. I'm trying to enable functionality which allow me to reorder the placement of images when used in another list. Currently i'm setting up the image list below, however I'm unable to set the defaultIsOrderable to true due to the error pasted.
KeystoneJS list:
Image: list({
fields: {
title: text({
validation: { isRequired: true },
isIndexed: 'unique',
isFilterable: true,
isOrderable: true,
}),
images: cloudinaryImage({
cloudinary: {
cloudName: process.env.CLOUDINARY_CLOUD_NAME,
apiKey: process.env.CLOUDINARY_API_KEY,
apiSecret: process.env.CLOUDINARY_API_SECRET,
folder: process.env.CLOUDINARY_API_FOLDER,
},
}),
},
defaultIsOrderable: true
}),
Error message:
The expected type comes from property 'defaultIsOrderable' which is declared here on type 'ListConfig<BaseListTypeInfo, BaseFields<BaseListTypeInfo>>'
Peeking at the definition of the field shows
defaultIsOrderable?: false | ((args: FilterOrderArgs<ListTypeInfo>) => MaybePromise<boolean>);
Looking at the schema API docs, the defaultIsOrderable lets you set:
[...] the default value to use for isOrderable for fields on this list.
You're trying to set this to true but, according to the relevant section of the field docs, the isOrderable field option already defaults to true.
I believe this is why the defaultIsOrderable type doesn't allow you to supply the true literal – doing so would be redundant.
So that explains the specific error your getting but I think you also may have misunderstood the purpose of the orderBy option.
The OrderBy Option
The field docs mention the two effects the field OrderBy option has:
If true (default), the GraphQL API and Admin UI will support ordering by this field.
Take, for example, your Image list above.
As the title field is "orderable", it is included in the list's orderBy GraphQL type (ImageOrderByInput).
When querying the list, you can order the results by the values in this field, like this:
query {
images (orderBy: [{ title: desc }]) {
id
title
images { publicUrl }
}
}
The GraphQL API docs have some details on this.
You can also use the field to order items when listing them in the Admin UI, either by clicking the column heading or selecting the field from the "sort" dropdown:
Note though, these features order items at runtime, by the values stored in orderable fields.
They don't allow an admin to "re-order" items in the Admin UI (unless you did so by changing the image titles in this case).
Specifying an Order
If you want to set the order of items within a list you'd need to store separate values in, for example, a displayOrder field like this:
Image: list({
fields: {
title: text({
validation: { isRequired: true },
isIndexed: 'unique',
isFilterable: true,
}),
displayOrder: integer(),
// ...
},
}),
Unfortunately Keystone doesn't yet give you a great way to manage this the Admin UI (ie. you can't "drag and drop" in the list view or anything like that). You need to edit each item individually to set the displayOrder values.
Ordering Within a Relationship
I notice your question says you're trying to "reorder the placement of images when used in another list" (emphasis mine).
In this case you're talking about relationships, which changes the problem somewhat. Some approaches are..
If the relationship is one-to-many, you can use the displayOrder: integer() solution shown above but the UX is worse again. You're still setting the order values against each item but not in the context of the relationship. However, querying based on these order values and setting them via the GraphQL API should be fairly straight forward.
If the relationship is many-to-many, it's similar but you can't store the "displayOrder" value in the Image list as any one image may be linked to multiple other items. You need to store the order info "with" the relationship itself. It's not trivial but my recent answer on storing additional values on a many-to-many relationship may point you in the right direction.
A third option is to not use the relationship field at all but to link items using the inline relationships functionality of the document field. This is a bit different to work with - easier to manage from the Admin UI but less powerful in GraphQL as you can't traverse the relationship as easily. However it does give you a way to manage a small, ordered set of related items in a many-to-many relationship.
You can save an ordered set of ids to a json field. This is similar to using a document field but a more manual.
Hopefully that clears up what's possible with the current "orderBy" functionality and relationship options. Which of these solutions is most appropriate depends heavily on the specifics of your project and use case.
Note too, there are plans to extend Keystone's functionality for sorting and reordering lists from both the DX and UX perspectives.
See "Sortable lists" on the Keystone roadmap.
I'm working on an app where users learn about different patterns of grammar in a language. There are three collections; users and patterns are interrelated by progress, which looks like this:
Create(Collection("progress"), {
data: {
userRef: Ref(Collection("users"), userId),
patternRef: Ref(Collection("patterns"), patternId),
initiallyLearnedAt: Now(),
lastReviewedAt: Now(),
srsLevel: 1
}
})
I've learned how to do some basic Fauna queries, but now I have a somewhat more complex relational one. I want to write an FQL query (and the required indexes) to retrieve all patterns for which a given user doesn't have progress. That is, everything they haven't learned yet. How would I compose such a query?
One clarifying assumption - a progress document is created when a user starts on a particular pattern and means the user has some progress. For example, if there are ten patterns and a user has started two, there will be two documents for that user in progress.
If that assumption is valid, your question is "how can we find the other eight?"
The basic approach is:
Get all available patterns.
Get the patterns a user has worked on.
Select the difference between the two sets.
1. Get all available patterns.
This one is trivial with the built-in Documents function in FQL:
Documents(Collection("patterns"))
2. Get the patterns a user has worked on.
To get all the patterns a user has worked on, you'll want to create an index over the progress collection, as you've figured out. Your terms are what you want to search on, in this case userRef. Your values are the results you want back, in this case patternRef.
This looks like the following:
CreateIndex({
name: "patterns_by_user",
source: Collection("progress"),
terms: [
{ field: ["data", "userRef"] }
],
values: [
{ field: ["data", "patternRef"] }
],
unique: true
})
Then, to get the set of all the patterns a user has some progress against:
Match(
"patterns_by_user",
Ref(Collections("users"), userId)
)
3. Select the difference between the two sets
The FQL function Difference has the following signature:
Difference( source, diff, ... )
This means you'll want the largest set first, in this case all of the documents from the patterns collection.
If you reverse the arguments you'll get an empty set, because there are no documents in the set of patterns the user has worked on that are not also in the set of all patterns.
From the docs, the return value of Difference is:
When source is a Set Reference, a Set Reference of the items in source that are missing from diff.
This means you'll need to Paginate over the difference to get the references themselves.
Paginate(
Difference(
Documents(Collection("patterns")),
Match(
"patterns_by_user",
Ref(Collection("users"), userId)
)
)
)
From there, you can do what you need to do with the references. As an example, to retrieve all of the data for each returned pattern:
Map(
Paginate(
Difference(
Documents(Collection("patterns")),
Match(
"patterns_by_user",
Ref(Collection("users"), userId)
)
)
),
Lambda("patternRef", Get(Var("patternRef")))
)
Consolidated solution
Create the index patterns_by_user as in step two
Query the difference as in step three
Trying to order all rows of a model for an ordering filter with react on the front, I have encountered this problem.
For example if I have "rooms" and each reservation having many products, having each product different prices, I came up with this way of ordering the rooms by the their respective lowest valued product or the highest:
scope :high_price, lambda { joins(:products).group('rooms.id').order('max(products.week_price) DESC') }
scope :low_price, lambda { joins(:products).group('rooms.id').order('min(products.week_price) ASC') }
The problem comes when, if I save this into an instance variable:
#ordered_rooms = Room.low_price
And then I try to manipulate given instance, I will run into this issue:
ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid (PG::GroupingError: ERROR: column "products.id" must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be used in an aggregate function
I found some explanation of the problem here, but then my doubt would be how to do this queries so this error does not come up?
I found that, if the metric I was looking for, would be the number of products by room, it would be easier to look up with:
scope :most_products, lambda { order('products_count DESC') }
adding this relation into product:
belongs_to :room, required: false, counter_cache: true
would it be possible to define this kind of cache for other metrics, or how should I go about these queries?
I do query cars from an api with a single query but two resolvers (listing and listings)(hopefully resolver is the right name for it). One car I get by the id via listing and the other cars I get without filters by listings. The resolvers output the data i a little different structure on the server-side but I do get the same fields just at different „places“. I want to merge the structure in order to get a single array I can simply loop over in vue.js. For the apicalls I do use vue-apollo.
Couldn't find any information to merge data client-side inside graphqlqueries. All I found is about handling it serverside with resolvers but it's an api I do not own.
Is it possible with graphql or do I have to merge it inside my vuecomponent and if so what would be the best way to do so?
The output will be a grid of cars where I show the car of the week (requested by id) together with the newest cars of the regarding cardealer.
Full screenshot including response: https://i.imgur.com/gkCZczY.png
Stripped down example with just the id to show the problem:
query CarTeaser ($guid: String! $withVehicleDetails: Boolean!) {
search {
listing(guid: $guid){
details{
identifier{
id #for example: here I get the id under details->identifier
}
}
}
listings( metadata: { size: 2 sort:{ field: Age order: Asc}}) {
listings{
id #here it's right under listings
details{
…
}
}
}
}
}
}
Ideally you're right, it should be handled server-side, but if it's not your API the only solution is to manipulate the data on the client side, meaning in your component.
It's probably a lot simpler to leave the listings array untouched and to just merge the listing element with it, like this for instance:
// assuming 'search' holds the entire data queried from the api
const fullListing = [
// car of the week, data reformatted to have an identical structure as
// the 'other' cars
{
id: search.listing.details.identifier.id,
details: {
vehicle: search.listing.details.vehicle,
},
},
...search.listings.listings, // the 'other' cars
]
In my rails app, I have Organizations and related posts belonging to the Organization.
Organization Model has a type attribute ie. enum
e.g. :gov, :edu, :sports etc.
enum sp_type: { gov: 0, edu: 1, sports: 2 }
I can get the list of Organization of type edu with
Organization.edu
I can get the posts by Organization.edu.includes(:posts)
I want to get all the posts belonging to the organizations of sp_type edu, what query should I perform to get the list of all the posts sorted by their updated_at.
type is used for STI, so it's not very much recommended to use it as a column name.
The query (to get organizations):
Organization.where(sp_type: Organization.sp_types[:edu]))
.includes(:posts)
.where.not(posts: { id: nil })
.order('posts.updated_at')
The query to get posts:
Post.joins(:organization)
.where(organizations: { sp_type: Organization.sp_types[:edu]})
.group('posts.id')
.order('posts.updated_at')