After I loaded a List of tasks with a taskQuery
taskService.createTaskQuery()
.processDefinitionKey(PROCESSKEY)
.taskCandidateGroupIn(list).initializeFormKeys().list()
What is the best way to find out the candidate group of every task?
I want to display it in a JSF view, but the class Task has no corresponding field.
You can get a task's identity links using the task service. Among other relations, the candidate group relation is expressed as an identity link. The following code filters a task's identity links for those that represent candidate groups:
List<IdentityLink> identityLinks = taskService.getIdentityLinksForTask(task.getId());
for (IdentityLink identityLink : identityLinks) {
String type = identityLink.getType();
/* type corresponds to the constants defined in IdentityLinkType.
"candidate" identitifies a candidate relation */
String groupId = identityLink.getGroupId();
if (IdentityLinkType.CANDIDATE.equals(type) && groupId != null) {
// we have found a candidate group; do something
}
}
The best approach is to write a custom query that gives you all task information the way you need them with on select. You do not want to start looping over result lists and sending one or more query per item, especially not in a high performance application as your task list.
Check the custom query documentation for details.
Only select task which have a candidate groups.
List<Task> candidateGroupList = taskService.createTaskQuery().withCandidateGroups().list();
Related
I've got the problem when two people at the same time tries to add each other to friends. So, at first when one person presses add to friends he checks, whether other user's groups doesn't have my ID. If he has, I don't need to create new group - I will just add this group's ID to my list, else - I will create new group. Now, when two people at the same time press that button, they both get the result that group doesn't exist thus they both create a new group. How to solve these kind of problems?
Structure:
"userGroups" : {
"myId1" : {
"generatedGroupId1" : "myFriendID1"
}
}
Update: I've managed to do it: basically in doTransaction I create group if it doesn't exist and then on onComplete I work with already created group. If two people start creating new group, one end up creating it, second one - reading it.
// function
ref.runTransaction(object : Transaction.Handler {
override fun doTransaction(currentData: MutableData): Transaction.Result {
// create group here if data is null
return Transaction.success(currentData)
}
override fun onComplete(
error: DatabaseError?,
committed: Boolean,
currentData: DataSnapshot?
) {
Log.d(TAG, "postTransaction:onComplete:" + error)
// continue doing stuff, group already exists at this point
}
})
}
It's hard to give specific without seeing your code, but the most likely options are (in order of my personal preference):
Base the group ID on the two users in it. If you do this correct, the two users will end up with the same group ID, and it doesn't matter who is first. Creating the groups then becomes a so-called idempotent operation, which means that if you run the same operation multiple times, it will have the same result. For an example of such group IDs, see Best way to manage Chat channels in Firebase
Use a transaction to ensure only one write makes it through. This would mean that the second user ends up reading the group created by the first user, and can then cancel their data creation.
Use a Cloud Function, which can perform more (non-atomic) read operations to check whether the group of users already exists, and reject the request from the second user.
I am looking for a query (lucene, fts-alfresco or ...) to return all the document which have a specific child association (that is not null).
Some context:
Documents of type abc:document have a child-association abc:linkedDocument.
Not all document have an other document linked to them, some have none some have one or multiple.
I need a fast and easy way to get an overview of all the documents that do have at least one document linked to them.
Currently I have a webscript that does what I need, but prefer not to have tons of webscripts which are not business related.
code:
SearchParameters sp = new SearchParameters();
String query = "TYPE:\"abc:document\"";
StoreRef store = StoreRef.STORE_REF_WORKSPACE_SPACESSTORE;
sp.addStore(store);
sp.setLanguage(SearchService.LANGUAGE_FTS_ALFRESCO);
sp.setQuery(query);
ResultSet rs = services.getSearchService().query(sp);
List<NodeRef> nodeRefs = rs.getNodeRefs();
for (NodeRef ref : nodeRefs) {
List<ChildAssociationRef> refs = services.getNodeService().getChildAssocs(ref);
for(ChildAssociationRef chref : refs){
if(chref.getQName().equals(AbcModel.ASSOC_LINKED_DOC)){
logger.debug("Document with linked doc: {}", ref);
break;
}
}
}
Associations aren't query-able so you'll have to do what you are doing, which is essentially checking every node in a result set for the presence of a desired association.
The only improvement I can suggest is that you can ask for the child associations of a specific type which would prevent you from having to check the type of every child association, see How to get all Child associations with a specific Association Type Alfresco (Java)
Using Camunda as the tool for orchestration of the microservices. At later time, I find the process_instances_id generated necessary for continuing a particular process by using it in messageEventReceived(). Code as follows:
val processid = getProcessID(key1, key2)
val runtimeService = processengine.getRuntimeService
val subscription = runtimeService.createEventSubscriptionQuery
.eventType("message")
.eventName(eventname)
.processInstanceId(executionid)
.singleResult
runtimeService.messageEventReceived(subscription.getEventName, subscription.getExecutionId)
As of this moment the processid is saved and then retrieved from the database using the getProcessID(...) function when necessary. Is this proper?
Does camunda already have the list of process_ids in its own database? If so, how do I retrieve a particular process instance id just giving composite key(s)? Is that even possible?
It is the common way. You can also use the public api to get the process instance and his id via the process definition key.
See the following example from the documentation:
runtimeService.createProcessInstanceQuery()
.processDefinitionKey("invoice")
.list();
For your given example there is also a simpler way. It is possible to correlate the message via the runtime service.
See this example from the documenation:
runtimeService.createMessageCorrelation("messageName")
.processInstanceBusinessKey("AB-123")
.setVariable("payment_type", "creditCard")
.correlate();
You can use
runtimeService.createProcessInstanceQuery().list();
the query supports fluent criteria for filtering, for example on process_key, variables, businessKey ...
My Object has many transactions which belong to a type, whcich then belong to a group. I would like to pull all the transactions from my Object which are in a specific group, say blue.
Been trying to do this using both SQL and Activerecord and have failed in both endeavors.
I can get this procedure to print out the quality by which I then want to sort by:
object.transactions.map { |to| "#{to.transaction_type.transaction_group.name}" }
And here is a sample of what i have been running, but oviously dosen't work. Haven't managed to find a way to
id = Group.find_by_name("name")
object.transactions.where(transaction_type.group_id == id)
Can you do something like:
id = Group.find_by_name("name")
object.transactions.
joins(:type).
where("types.group_id" => id)
I have a Project model that has a property of type IProjectWorker, this could either be a single User or a Team. In Castle ActiveRecord it's defined like this:
[Any(typeof(int), MetaType = typeof(string), TypeColumn = "WorkerType", IdColumn = "WorkerID", Cascade = CascadeEnum.None)]
[Any.MetaValue("USER", typeof(User))]
[Any.MetaValue("TEAM", typeof(Team))]
public IProjectWorker Worker { get; set; }
Now I need to be able to search for projects where the worker's name contains some text. My initial reaction was something like this:
query
.CreateAlias("Worker", "Worker")
.Add(Restrictions.InsensitiveLike("Worker.WorkerName", SearchText, MatchMode.Anywhere));
But this gives me an error-- "any types do not have a unique referenced persister". This makes sense, it doesn't know how to handle joining to the two different tables for the search.
Can I make two different aliases for each table and do a Restrictions.Or() across them? I tried it, but couldn't quite get it right. Or is there some other way to do this using criteria that I'm missing? Or am I going to have to use HQL instead?