I've been implementing some filters onto some Rally Apps that track Defects so far and the fields I've used to filter on have all been of 'string' type.
I was wondering if it would be possible to add a comboBox drop down filter for Milestones. I believe the answer to this question is no, because the Milestones are not tied to the 'Defect' model at all and is a Collection object as opposed to a string object. I imagine some degree of hydrating the Milestones may be involved to achieve this result, but quite honestly I'm just not sure. So I wanted to seek the veteran advice of Rally Developers on SO, so-- is it possible?
You are in luck! The Milestones collection is actually on the Artifact type, which Defect inherits from. There is a MilestoneComboBox you can use for selecting one, and then you can use a filter like this to query for matching results:
{
property: 'Milestones',
operator: 'contains',
value: '/milestone/12345' //the value of the combobox
}
Related
I read about createCriteria, and kind of interested on how these works, and its usability in providing values for dropdown box.
So say, i have a table in the database, Resource table, where i have defined the table in the domain class called Resource.groovy. Resource table has a total of 10 columns, where 5 of it are
Material Id
Material description
Resource
Resource Id
Product Code
So using the createCriteria, and i can use just like a query to return the items that i want to
def resList = Resource.createCriteria().list {
and {
eq('resource', resourceInstance)
ne('materialId', '-')
}
}
Where in the above, i want to get the data that matches the resource = resourceInstance, and none of the materialId is equal to '-'.
I want to use the returned data from createCriteria above on my form, where i want to use some of the column on my select dropdown. Below is the code i used for my select dropdown.
<g:select id="resourceId" name="resourceId"
from="${resList}"
disabled="${actionName != 'show' ? false : true}" />
How do i make it so that in a dropdown, it only shows the values taken from column Product Code? I believe the list created using createCriteria returns all 10 columns based on the createCriteria's specification. But i only want to use the Product Column values on my dropdown.
How do i customize the data if in one of the select dropdown in my form, i wanted to show the values as "Resource Id - Resource Description"? The values are combination of more than 1 columns for one select dropdown but i don't know how to combine both in a single select dropdown.
I read that hql and GORM query are better ways of fetching data from table than using createCriteria. Is this true?
Thanks
First of all refer to the document for using select in Grails. To answer all questions:
Yes, the list to select from in the dropdown can be customized. In this case it should be something like from="${resList*.productCode}"
Yes, this can be customized as well with something like
from="${resList.collect { \"${it.resourceId} - ${it.resourceDesc}\" } }"
It depends. If there are associations involved in a domain then using Criteria will lead to eager fetches which might not be required. But with HQL one gets the flexibility of tailoring the query as needed. With latest version of Grails those boundries are minimized a lot. Usage of DetachedCriteria, where queries etc are recommended whereever possible. So it is kind of mixing and matching to the scenario under consideration.
I have a model that looks like this:
and want to display it in a UITableView using an NSFetchedResultsController. I want to list all of the Objects for a given Owner, grouped by Group. For example, if we were to view the groups for some Owner Owner A the table view might look like this:
Group A
Object A
Object B
Object C
Group B
Object A
Object D
Group C
Group D
Object C
Object E
It's also important that the Groups be ordered by their name attribute (not shown in the schema above) and that NSFetchedResultsController delegate methods get called whenever Objects are modified or added/removed from a Group.
Given those requirements, I have set up the NSFetchedResultsController to fetch a bunch of Objects with a predicate like [NSPredicate predicateWithFormat:#"ANY groups.owner = %#", someOwner], which throws an NSInvalidArgumentException exception: "to-many key not allowed here". I have tried a few other predicates, but am stuck.
Any suggestions? Is this not something I should be using an NSFetchedResultsController for? Or is there a better way to model my data?
Thanks!
Edit: I actually got the predicate working with the above code, my mistake was in my sectionNameKeyPath argument. I was trying to pass in groups.name, which was what was producing the error. I can see why that way wouldn't work, but am struggling to find a different way to achieve the desired results. Perhaps a join object?
Edit 2: This works somewhat well with a join object like this:
There are two downsides that I see now. The first is that I have to enforce uniqueness myself using code. That's easy enough, but a bit of a nuisance. The second downside, that I don't yet see a way around, is that the NSFetchedResultsController will not call its delegate for updates to Objects anymore. I can live with that downside for now, but am happy to hear better suggestions.
I think the problem you're going to see is that if you have a fetched results controller searching for Objects then it's going to find each Object only exactly once. So each object will appear exactly once in your table. Whereas what you sort of want to do is invert things and find all the Groups, then displaying all the relevant contained Objects. In terms of the fetched results controller, rather than finding rows and thereby being able to divide into sections you want to find sections and thereby figure out what to supply as rows.
The easiest thing, I think, would be to create a fetched results controller on Group and to add an intermediary object of your own that remaps those to sections and supplies group.objects (with a suitably deterministic sorting applied) as the rows per section.
If you want the rows to be dynamic then I guess the easiest thing is to create a fetched results controller per section based on the feedback of the Group controller.
If that's all getting a bit painful and you want to just write your own collection logic then you'll probably want to catch NSManagedObjectContextDidSaveNotification and rerun your logic whenever that occurs. For memory efficiency reasons you probably want to keep hold only of the objectIDs and to get the appropriate objects only when the table view requests them via the existingObjectWithID:error: method on the context. Core Data has a built-in caching mechanism that responds appropriately to memory warnings so that's all written for you.
You shouldn't need a join object to get at data in Many to Many relationships
See this answer: How to deal with many to many relationships with NSFetchedResultsController?
And example project: https://github.com/dmathewwws/Many-to-Many-CoreData
Good afternoon everyone!
I'm studying NHibernate, and decided to make some changes. Among them, I noticed that some fields are unnecessary. So I bring my doubt:
I have a list, let's call it Class_List within each study class, I can have N students for each class. Within the list Class_List, I also have other properties as simple as the name of the class.
How I see it is unnecessary to store how many students I have in the database, I would, in a single query, how many records I have. This, using NHibernate.
Is this possible? How?
Best regards,
Gustavo.
Edit: I've forgot to say one thing... I want to return this number of record, as a column. But this column is not mapped in my .hbm.xml file.
If students are mapped as a collection on Class, you can try using something like this:
var numberOfStudents = session.CreateCriteria<Class>()
.Add(Restrictions.IdEq(1))
.CreateCriteria("_students", "students")
.SetProjection(Projections.RowCount())
.UniqueResult<Int32>();
Where '1' is the id of the class (you can use other property) and '_students' is the name of the students collection.
I'm using Core Data for a tableview. My data is ordered by the distance from your current location. What I'd like is to have a new section for items with 5, 10 and 20 miles.
My distance value is stored in the data store as an NSInteger and I get it out using a NSNumber in my object model.
I've done a bit of searching around and found that I need to use the sectionNameKeyPath attribute to make the data sectioned.
My problem is that I don't know the best way to group the data. During my searches I came across either a transient property or using a category of NSNumber to work out which section the item should be in.
Are either of these methods the best way of getting my end result, if so, can anyone provide any details on how to implement it?
Thanks.
You should add a derived attribute to the object (it's not strictly needed in the model), let's name it range. I'd make it a read only property, you can cache the value or not.
When it's 0-5, return 5, 5.x - 10 return 10, etc.
Then set range as your sectionNameKeyPath.
If you want a highly customized section behavior, you need to subclass NSFetchedResultsController to give you the behavior you want. See the NSFetchedResultsController class docs for details.
You will need to subclass in this case because your not looking at a single ordered attribute like the alphabetized first letter of a string attribute but rather a range in which each attribute falls into.
This is a cleaner solution than altering the data model because you can use it to display the data many different ways in many different tableviews without having to muddy up your data model.
I've got a table in my database storing items:
Items
-------
ItemID
Name
...
Etc
and a separate table storing the PK of two different items from the first table. I want to be able to list the one item, and then any number of related items. I've tried searching for examples but haven't found much surprisingly...
RelatedItems
------------
ItemID
RelatedItemID
If I have four products, whose IDs are 1, 2, 3 and 4... and 1 is related to 2 and 3 I might have data that looks like this:
ItemID RelatedItemID
1 2
1 3
4 1
I am then modeling them in the Entity Framework Designer, and the designer automatically adds an association from the Items table to itself (many to many). The designer also adds two navigation properties, if I use the first property on Item #1 I get all items where Item #1 is in the first column, and if I use the second property I get all the items where Item #1 is in the second column.
I however just want to have one navigation property where I can say Items.RelatedItems and it returns all the items that the above two properties would when combined. I know I can join the two results after the fact but I can't help to think I'm doing something wrong and there is a better way.
Hopefully this is all clear enough.
It sounds like SQL schemas just aren't very good at modeling the concept you're looking for. The schema you've chosen would work well if you want to establish a directional relationship (item A is related to item B, but item B may or may not be related to item A). If you were looking for a grouping-style relationship (Items A and B are in the same group), I can think of a different approach you'd use. But I can't think of a good way to model an inherently bi-directional relationship using a traditional relational database.
Some workarounds might be to use a View that joins the two results, or to use triggers to make sure that every mapping from A to B has a corresponding mapping from B to A, so that both of the properties always return the same objects.
If you have an instance of an Item, call it item, then the following will give you the related items...
item.RelatedItems.Select(ri => ri.Item);
Your RelatedItems property on item (ie the first navigation property you mentioned) will be a collection of RelatedItem objects, each of which has two navigation properties of its own, one of which will be named Item and will be a link to the related item.
Note that this is air code, as I'm not in front of anything I can test this on right now, but I think this will do what you want.
If you want to make it simpler, you can write an extension method to wrap up the Select(), something like this...
public static IEnumerable<Item> RelItems(this Item item) {
return item.RelatedItems.Select(ri => ri.Item);
}
Then you could just do...
item.RelItems();
Note that I couldn't name the extension method RelatedItems, as that would clash with the navigation property that EF would have created for the second table. That's perhaps not a good name for that tables, as it's not the actual items, rather the IDs of the items. Either way, the above code should work.