I have a field of the type number defined on a document in my schema. When the user inputs a number, I want a validation which verifies that no another document of the same type has the same number assigned to this field. How am I able to do this?
There's no out of the box solution to check for uniqueness. Currently the only input that does this is the slug field. However, you can create your own custom validation that uses the client to check for other documents with the same number for the specific field.
You can read more about custom validation in the docs. To import the client, you can add this to the top of your schema import client from 'part:#sanity/base/client'. Then, write a GROQ query to look for the number and validate accordingly.
Hope that helps!
Related
_name = "my.table"
building_id = fields.Many2one('building', related='floor_id.building_id', readonly=False)
floor_id = fields.Many2one('building.floor')
A user with the read access to 'building' and 'building.floor' tables, tries to create a record in "my.table" If the user chooses building_id and floor_id together an error occurs. The error says that my user has no access to write 'building.floor' table. My question is: why a related field use the write function, what is the difference between the compute and related in this scenario?
Related fields are very simple computed fields. So simple they can be "implemented" with one parameter on field definition. Odoo has generic methods for those fields. For example a lot of developers don't write inverse methods for computed fields, which inverse the compute method, because the simply don't need it. But without it and without storing the computed field, Odoo sets the field readonly.
Related fields have a generic inverse method. In your case changing building_id when there was already a floor_id chosen, Odoo will write the building_id on that floor_id.building_id, because that's how related fields work (i know that's not the best explanation).
The user obviously has no write/update rights on builiding.floor model and that's why there will be the access error message in the end, because Odoo wants to write the new building on the floor.
Seems to me you want to filter the floors by buildings, but you shouldn't use a related field for that. Just put a domain on floor_id which filters by the chosen building_id:
floor_id = fields.Many2one('building.floor', domain="[('building_id', '=?', building_id)]")
You could also use domain operator =, but =? will show all floors when no building was set yet.
I need a new field inside Contact model that would hold information about Allowed companies of the related user.
Now there is only field about Currently picked company by that user (and it is not enough for me to make a record rule).
The field I want to copy values from is inside model Users and it is called company_ids.
I’m trying to add this field in the developer mode (Settings > Technical > Fields) like this:
But I’m having trouble with code that would fill my field with values from the another model.
for record in self:
record[("x_company_ids")] = env['res.users'].company_ids
I’m guessing that the record is referring to a record inside Contact model and it does not contain fields from another models like Users. So I can’t figure it out how to reference a field from another model.
Something similar to this: env['res.users'].company_ids?
It is even harder for me because it is many2many field and should always update when the source changes.
Maybe better solution would be to use Automatic action to write values to this field?
I saw some threads like this: Computed many2many field dependencies in Odoo 10.
But it seems like in those cases they had clear connection between the fields and I don't have it. I don't know how to get related user while I'm inside Contact model. I know only how to this oposite way (from user to contact): user.partner_id.id
Here in below given code you haven't specified related user from which you will get company_ids, you have directly accessing company_ids
for record in self:
record[("x_company_ids")] = env['res.users'].company_ids
You can write as following :
for record in self:
record["x_company_ids"] = self.env['res.users'].search([('partner_id','=',record.id)]).company_ids
I want make the program more simple, so I use table's field name as name in input html,
And then I can save some time for mapping input name to database field name
But, are there security risks if user know my field name?
(Suppose SQL injection have handled in the server program)
Update 1:
I am not going to around the field name validation
I just don't want to do something like this
$uid=$_POST['user_id'];
$ufname=$_POST['user_first_name'];
$ulname=$_POST['user_last_name'];
If I do this
$user_id=$_POST['user_id'];
$user_first_name=$_POST['user_first_name'];
$user_first_name=$_POST['user_last_name'];
I can save coding time, and don't need to think two names for one data, and reduce bug.
and I can also do something like this to save more time as I just type the name once.
$validField=array("user_id","user_first_name","user_last_name");
foreach ($validField as $field) {
$orm[$field]=$field;
}
This can also valid the field name
so I think that hacks are no way to get my unpublished fields
I can save some time for mapping input name to database field name.
If you save time mapping input names to database field names, you would need to spend a roughly equivalent time validating that the field names are, in fact, among the fields that the users can access in your database. There is no way around this validation, because otherwise your DB is exposed to hacks that try and get your unpublished fields, such as IDs and hashes. This is pretty bad, so you would need to build that validation layer.
On the other hand, if you do a mapping from meaningless IDs to meaningful, then you do not need validation, because it is your program that produced the meaningful IDs. Essentially, the validation step is built into the process.
Can anyone tell me if they are know for certain whether or not survey monkey's api has the ability to return the unique ID associated with their designated unique id specifications:
http://help.surveymonkey.com/articles/en_US/kb/Can-I-track-respondents-using-a-unique-ID
It states the following regarding viewing this in the aforementioned link:
When these results come back on the survey, that custom ID of "00001"
appears in the Custom Value field in the Analyze > Browse Responses
section.
However I cannot find any mention of this data being returned from their API in the API documentation:
https://developer.surveymonkey.com
It can be retrieved by sending 'custom_id' as a requested field to 'get_respondent_list':
https://developer.surveymonkey.com/mashery/get_respondent_list
It will then be in the 'custom_id' field in the respondent's dictionary.
I am working to create a Java based RESTful API that uses Spring MVC.
Now for some of the API endpoints-- multiple different parameters are required... I am not talking about a list of values-- more like parameter1, parameter2, parameter3, parameter4 and so on-- where all the 4 (or more) parameters are of different data types as well.
How do I design the API endpoint URL for the above scenario, eg for 4 separate input parameters? Is there any recommended way/best practice for doing this? Or do I simply concatenate the 4 values, with ach pair of values separated by a delimiter like "/"?
EDIT from user comment:
Example: I have to retrieve a custom object(a 'file') based on 4 input parameters--(Integer) userid, (Integer) fileid, (String) type, and (String) usertype. Should I simply create a REST Endpoint like "getfile/{userid}/{fileid}/{type}/{usertype}-- or is there a better (or recommended way) to construct such REST endpoints?
In REST start by thinking about the resource and coming up with immutable permalinks (doesn't change)to identify that resource.
So, in your example (in comment), you said you want to retrieve a file resource for a user and type (file type or user type?)
So, start with just enough information to identify the resource. If the id is unique, then this is enough to identify the resource regardless of the user who owns the file:
/files/{fileId}
That's also important as the url if a file could change owners - remember we want to identify the resource with just the components needed so it can be a permalink.
You could also list the files for a specific user:
/users/{userId}/files/
The response would contain a list of files and each of those items in the list would contain links to the files (/files/{fileId})
If for some reason the file id is not unique but is unique only in the context of a user (files don't change owners and id increments within a user - wierd) then you would need these components to identify the resource:
/users/{userId}/files/{fileId}
Also note the order based on the description. In that wierd case, we said the files are logically contained and IDed by the user and that's also the containment in the url structure.
Hope that helps.
A GET request to file/{usertype}/{user}/{type}/{fileid} sounds good