I have an endpoint lets say /order/ where i can send json object(my order), which contains some products etc, so my problem is i have to first save the order and wait for the order id back from the db and then save my products with this new order id( we are talking many to many relation thats why theres another table)
Consider this controller method
def postOrder = Action(parse.json[OrderRest]) { req => {
Created(Json.toJson(manageOrderService.insertOrder(req.body)))
}
}
this is how my repo methods look like
def addOrder(order: Order) = db.run {
(orders returning orders) += order
}
how can i chain db.runs to first insert order, get order id and then insert my products with this order id i just got?
im thinking about putting some service between my controller and repo, and managing those actions there, but i have no idea where to start
You can use for to chain database operations. Here is an example of adding a table to a db by adding a header row to represent the table and then adding the data rows. In this case it is a simple table containing (age, value).
/** Add a new table to the database */
def addTable(name: String, table: Seq[(Int, Int)]) = {
val action = for {
key <- (Headers returning Headers.map(_.tableId)) += HeadersRow(0, name)
_ <- Values ++= table.map { case (age, value) => ValuesRow(key, age, value) }
} yield key
db.run(action.transactionally)
}
This is cut down from the working code, but it should give the idea of how to do what you want. The first for statement would generate the order id and then the second statement would add the order with that order id.
This is done transactionally so that the new order will not be created unless the order data is valid (in database terms).
Related
New to SQL & databases, creating an in-app shop that holds different items.
void _createTableItems(Batch batch) {
batch.execute('DROP TABLE IF EXISTS Items');
batch.execute('''CREATE TABLE boughtItems (
id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
price INTEGER
)''');
}
class Item {
Item({required this.id, required this.price, required this.title});
String title;
int id;
int price;
}
List<Item> availableProducts = [WeaponItem(id: 0, strength: 5), WeaponItem(id: 1, strength: 7), StableItem(id: 2, speed: 4), FoodItem(id: 3, rev: 7)]
I pretty much have the most basic strucutre possible right now.
When I need to get the products, all I do is search the availableProducts list of items for ID's in the database query.
Future<List<Item>> getBought() async {
await database;
List products = await _database!.query("Items");
List<Item> result = [];
for (var element in products) {
result.add(availableProducts.where((e) => e.id == element["id"]).first);
}
return result;
}
Is this an acceptable way to do this?
What I'm worried about is the mixing of item types.
I'm a bit lost since there's multiple things I could do. Should I create a different table holding all the properties of each individual items? Should I add a type string to the table to differentiate the different items?
I would create one table for example products. This table
has general information about the products(id, name, product_number, info) that all products have in common. If you want additional and different information for every product type, I would add a fk_type which references to a product_type(id, name) table that stores the different product types. Then I would create an additional table for every product type. Ex: product_weapon(id, size, ammunition, reload_time ), product_chair(id, high, depth, weight). But you can also work just with the simple product table and add general description fields that could store jsons, xmls, css files.
I have 2 tables contractPoint and contractPointHistory
ContractPointHistory
ContractPoint
I would like to get contractPoint where point will be subtracted by pointChange. For example: ContractPoint -> id: 3, point: 5
ContractPointHistory has contractPointId: 3 and pointChange: -5. So after manipulating point in contractPoint should be 0
I wrote this code, but it works just for getRawMany(), not for getMany()
const contractPoints = await getRepository(ContractPoint).createQueryBuilder('contractPoint')
.addSelect('"contractPoint".point + COALESCE((SELECT SUM(cpHistory.point_change) FROM contract_point_history AS cpHistory WHERE cpHistory.contract_point_id = contractPoint.id), 0) AS points')
.andWhere('EXTRACT(YEAR FROM contractPoint.validFrom) = :year', { year })
.andWhere('contractPoint.contractId = :contractId', { contractId })
.orderBy('contractPoint.grantedAt', OrderByDirection.Desc)
.getMany();
The method getMany can be used to select all attributes of an entity. However, if one wants to select some specific attributes of an entity then one needs to use getRawMany.
As per the documentation -
There are two types of results you can get using select query builder:
entities or raw results. Most of the time, you need to select real
entities from your database, for example, users. For this purpose, you
use getOne and getMany. But sometimes you need to select some specific
data, let's say the sum of all user photos. This data is not an
entity, it's called raw data. To get raw data, you use getRawOne and
getRawMany
From this, we can conclude that the query which you want to generate can not be made using getMany method.
Imagine that an entity has many fields and I just want to make changes in 1-2 fields, Is it possible to do that in Select? I don't want to mention all fields in my Select cause.
Ex: I want to return all fields and make a tiny change in OrderId field at the same time.
_context.Set<Table>.Select(t=>t.OrderId=t.OrderId+1)
A workaround I've found is to use select and copy every field to a new instance of your entity/object and change the field you want a computed value for, like:
_context.Operations
.Where(t => t.SessionId == sessionId)
.Select(o => new Operation
{
OperationId = o.OperationId + 1;
SessionId = o.SessionId,
Amount = o.Amount,
Date = o.Date,
});
I have a Linq-to-Entities query that is not complicated but requires an .include and/or projection and/or join because it must be executed in one pass.
Here is my database (Microsoft SQL Server 2008):
Table A (Customers) (contains CustomerID (customer IDs), and ZipCode (zip codes) as strings.
Table C (Categories) (contains CategoryID (categories) like "food", "shelter","clothing", "housing" (primary keys).
Table A_C is a linking table, since Tables A and C are linked as many-to-many: contains just two fields: CustomerID "customer IDs" and CategoryID (Categories), in combination as primary keys. This table is a linking table betweeen tables A and C.
Here is my query, that must be executed in just one trip to the database: I need to select all records in Table A that satisfy a condition, then filter these records depending on a 'list of parameters' that are found in the linking Table A_C--and do this all in one trip to the database. But I don't know what the length or composition of the list of parameters for Table A_C is, ahead of time--it varies from call to call. Thus this list of parameters varies method call by method call.
To give a more concrete example:
Table A has a list of customer IDs. I find the customers that live in a certain Zip code. Then, in the same SQL query, I need to find which of these customers have selected certain categories: Food, Clothing, Housing, etc, but my web method does not know ahead of time what these categories are, rather, they are passed as a list to the method: List myCategoryList (which could be 1 category or 100 categories, and varies method call by method call).
How do I write the projection using Linq-to-Entities? When the list of parameters varies? And do it all in one pass?
List<string> CategoryList = new List<string>() { "Food", "Shelter", "Housing" }; // in one call to the web service method
List<string> CategoryList = new List<string>() { "Food", "Clothing" }; //could be a second call--it varies and I don't know ahead of time what the List will be
So how can I do the SQL query using Linq-to-Entities? In one pass? (Of course I could loop through the list, and make repeated trips to the database, but that's not an optimal solution I am told). Projection,.Include are keywords but surfing the net yielded nothing.
Here is a crude guess, just to get ball rolling:
public void WebMethod1 (CategoryList)
{
using (EntityFramework1 context = new EntityFramework1())
{
/* assume CategoryList is a list of strings passed into the method and is,for this particular call,something like: List<string> CategoryList = new List<string>() { "Food", "Clothing" }; for this call, but in the next call it could be: List<string> CategoryList = new List<string>() { "Food", "Shelter", "Housing" } */
string ZipCodeString = "12345";
string customerIDString = "E12RJ55";
var CustomersFromZipCodeHavingSelectedCertainCategories = from x in context.A_C
where x.A.CustomerID == customerIDString
where x.A.StartsWith(ZipCodeString)
where x.A_C.Contains(CategoryList) //???? This is clearly not grammatical, but what is?
select x;
}
/*
my problem is: I want to filter all records from A that contain a zipcode 12345, and that also have a certain CustomerID "E12RJ55" from table A, but further filter this set with all such CustomerIDs in linking table A_C that contain the categories "Food" and "Clothing".
How to do this in one pass? I can do this quite easily in multiple passes and trips to the database using code, but somebody in this thread here http://bit.ly/rEG2AM suggested I do a Join/projection and do it all in one fell swoop.
*/
I will also accept SQL answers since it might help yield a solution. This question btw is not difficult I believe--but I could not find an answer on the net.
EDIT: with answer and credit to david s.
I thank you for the answer david.s. Here is what worked, slightly different than the answer by david.s, in that I am using the linking table (bridge table) called “Customer_Categories” that is between the table Customer and Categories and contains the primary key of each (as is required for many-to-many relationships). This bridge table is what I called "A_C" in my original answer, and here has ints rather than strings but is the same thing. Intellisense picked up this table and I used it, and it works. Also keep in mind that CategoryList is a list of ints, List CategoryList = new List();, yet amazingly it automagically works inside this SQL-to-Entities query:
Var CustomersFromZipCOde = context.Customers.Where (custo => custo.CustomerID==customerIDString && custo.ZipCode.StartsWith(ZipCodeString) && custo.Customer_Categories.Any(categ => CategoryList.Contains(categ.CategoryID)));
//gives the right output, incredible.
First of all i would like to say that even if you explanation is very long it is not very clear. You would like a simple Linq-to-Entities query but you don't give the Entities, you only speak of tables in your database.
Assuming you have the following entities:
public class Customer
{
public string CustomerID { get; set; }
public string ZipCode { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Category> Categories { get; set; }
}
public class Category
{
public string CategoryID { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Customer> Customers { get; set; }
}
Your query might look like this:
var CustomersFromZipCodeHavingSelectedCertainCategories =
context.Customers.Where(
customer => customer.CustomerID == customerIDString &&
customer.ZipCode.StartsWith(ZipCodeString) &&
customer.Categories.Any(
category => CategoryList.Contains(category.CategoryID));
More info on other ways to do this here:
http://smehrozalam.wordpress.com/2010/06/29/entity-framework-queries-involving-many-to-many-relationship-tables/
Domain Model
I've got a canonical Domain of a Customer with many Orders, with each Order having many OrderItems:
Customer
public class Customer
{
public Customer()
{
Orders = new HashSet<Order>();
}
public virtual int Id {get;set;}
public virtual ICollection<Order> Orders {get;set;}
}
Order
public class Order
{
public Order()
{
Items = new HashSet<OrderItem>();
}
public virtual int Id {get;set;}
public virtual Customer Customer {get;set;}
}
OrderItems
public class OrderItem
{
public virtual int Id {get;set;}
public virtual Order Order {get;set;}
}
Problem
Whether mapped with FluentNHibernate or hbm files, I run two separate queries, that are identical in their Fetch() syntax, with the exception of one including the .First() extension method.
Returns expected results:
var customer = this.generator.Session.Query<Customer>()
.Where(c => c.CustomerID == id)
.FetchMany(c => c.Orders)
.ThenFetchMany(o => o.Items).ToList()[0];
Returns only a single item in each collection:
var customer = this.generator.Session.Query<Customer>()
.Where(c => c.CustomerID == id)
.FetchMany(c => c.Orders)
.ThenFetchMany(o => o.Items).First();
I think I understand what's going on here, which is that the .First() method is being applied to each of the preceding statements, rather than just to the initial .Where() clause. This seems incorrect behavior to me, given the fact that First() is returning a Customer.
Edit 2011-06-17
After further research and thinking, I believe that depending on my mapping, there are two outcomes to this Method Chain:
.Where(c => c.CustomerID == id)
.FetchMany(c => c.Orders)
.ThenFetchMany(o => o.Items);
NOTE: I don't think I can get subselect behavior, since I'm not using HQL.
When the mapping is fetch="join" I should get a cartesian product between the Customer, Order and OrderItem tables.
When the mapping is fetch="select" I should get a query for Customer, and then multiple queries each for Orders and OrderItems.
How this plays out with adding the First() method to the chain is where I lose track of what should be happening.
The SQL Query that get's issued is the traditional left-outer-join query, with select top (#p0) in front.
The First() method is translated into SQL (T-SQL at least) as SELECT TOP 1 .... Combined with your join fetching, this will return a single row, containing one customer, one order for that customer and one item for the order. You might consider this a bug in Linq2NHibernate, but as join fetching is rare (and I think you're actually hurting your performance pulling the same Customer and Order field values across the network as part of the row for each Item) I doubt the team will fix it.
What you want is a single Customer, then all Orders for that customer and all Items for all those Orders. That happens by letting NHibernate run SQL that will pull one full Customer record (which will be a row for each Order Line) and construct the Customer object graph. Turning the Enumerable into a List and then getting the first element works, but the following will be slightly faster:
var customer = this.generator.Session.Query<Customer>()
.Where(c => c.CustomerID == id)
.FetchMany(c => c.Orders)
.ThenFetchMany(o => o.Items)
.AsEnumerable().First();
the AsEnumerable() function forces evaluation of the IQueryable created by Query and modified with the other methods, spitting out an in-memory Enumerable, without slurping it into a concrete List (NHibernate can, if it wishes, simply pull enough info out of the DataReader to create one full top-level instance). Now, the First() method is no longer applied to the IQueryable to be translated to SQL, but it is instead applied to an in-memory Enumerable of the object graphs, which after NHibernate has done its thing, and given your Where clause, should be zero or one Customer record with a hydrated Orders collection.
Like I said, I think you're hurting yourself using join fetching. Each row contains the data for the Customer and the data for the Order, joined to each distinct Line. That is a LOT of redundant data, which I think will cost you more than even an N+1 query strategy.
The best way I can think of to handle this is one query per object to retrieve that object's children. It would look like this:
var session = this.generator.Session;
var customer = session.Query<Customer>()
.Where(c => c.CustomerID == id).First();
customer.Orders = session.Query<Order>().Where(o=>o.CustomerID = id).ToList();
foreach(var order in customer.Orders)
order.Items = session.Query<Item>().Where(i=>i.OrderID = order.OrderID).ToList();
This requires a query for each Order, plus two at the Customer level, and will return no duplicate data. This will perform far better than a single query returning a row containing every field of the Customer and Order along with each Item, and also better than sending a query per Item plus a query per Order plus a query for the Customer.
I'd like to update the answer with my found so that could help anybody else with the same problem.
Since you are querying the entity base on their ID, you can use .Single instead of .First or .AsEnumerable().First():
var customer = this.generator.Session.Query<Customer>()
.Where(c => c.CustomerID == id)
.FetchMany(c => c.Orders)
.ThenFetchMany(o => o.Items).Single();
This will generate a normal SQL query with where clause and without the TOP 1.
In other situation, if the result has more than one Customer, exception will be thrown so it won't help if you really need the first item of a series based on condition. You have to use 2 queries, one for the first Customer and let the lazy load do the second one.