Creating a new Content Item in the migration with Orchard CMS - nhibernate

Here's my migration code:
public Migrations(IRepository<ProductPartRecord> productPartRepository, IRepository<CategoryPartRecord> categoryPartRepository)
{
_productPartRepository = productPartRepository;
_categoryPartRepository = categoryPartRepository;
}
public int Create() {
ContentDefinitionManager.AlterTypeDefinition("Category", builder => builder
.WithPart("CommonPart")
.WithPart("TitlePart")
.WithPart("AutoroutePart"));
ContentDefinitionManager.AlterTypeDefinition("Category", builder => builder
.WithPart("AutoroutePart", partBuilder => partBuilder
.WithSetting("AutorouteSettings.AllowCustomPattern", "true")
.WithSetting("AutorouteSettings.AutomaticAdjustmentOnEdit", "false")
.WithSetting("AutorouteSettings.PatternDefinitions", "[{Name:'Category Title', Pattern: 'category/{Content.Slug}', Description: 'category/category-title'}]")));
SchemaBuilder.CreateTable("CategoryPartRecord", table => table
.ContentPartRecord()
.Column<string>("Name")
.Column<string>("Description")
.Column<string>("Image")
);
ContentDefinitionManager.AlterTypeDefinition("Category", builder => builder
.WithPart("CategoryPart"));
ContentDefinitionManager.AlterTypeDefinition("Category", builder => builder
.Creatable()
.Draftable());
return 1;
}
public int UpdateFrom1() {
_categoryPartRepository.Create(new CategoryPartRecord { Name = "Category1", Description = "Description1", Image = "Image1" });
return 2;
}
UpdateFrom1 obviously attempts to insert a dummy record, but this causes nHibernate to throw this exception:
"attempted to assign id from null one-to-one property: ContentItemRecord"
The Part Record looks like:
public class CategoryPartRecord : ContentPartRecord {
public CategoryPartRecord()
{
CategoryProducts = new List<CategoryProductRecord>();
}
public virtual string Name { get; set; }
public virtual string Description { get; set; }
public virtual string Image { get; set; }
public virtual IList<CategoryProductRecord> CategoryProducts { get; set; }
}
Any clues as to where I'm going wrong here? Google produced nothing.

Okay, so you are creating a contentpartrecord, not a content item there. What you want is something more along the lines of:
var item = _orchardServices.ContentManager.New("Category").As<CategoryPart>();
item.Name = "Bobs Item"; // Something like that...
item.ContentItem.As<TitlePart>().Title = "Yay a title"; // This syntax may be wrong, I'm very tired
_orchardServices.ContentManager.Create(item);
_orchardServices.ContentManager.Publish(item.ContentItem);
I think that is how you would do it. Maybe you would want to look into creating content items using the import/export module, that is the more common and safe way to do it.

Not sure if the answer from Hazza works. Haven't tried that.
I usually just do this: (But not sure if it's an inferior approach in some way)
var item = _orchardServices.ContentManager.New("Category");
var cpart = item.As<CategoryPart>();
var tpart = item.As<TitlePart>();
cpart.Name = "SomeName";
tpart.Title = "SomeTitle";
_orchardServices.ContentManager.Create(item);
But to address the comment by Lawrence Johnson:
Category in this case is the content item. He is creating a new Category content item, and then extracting the corresponding CategoryPart from it.
If you are getting null when trying to extract the part you're probably missing something.
In order for this to work you need to implement the CategoryPart, CategoryPartRecord, CategoryPartHandler and CategoryPartDriver. (And of course make sure to attach your CategoryPart to you Category content item. Not certain if placement.info is required, but would add it for consistency anyway.)
You can't leave any of these out if you plan to use a Part attached to a content item.
I'm not sure if/how you can create a Part with no content item, but you can create a Record with no part and no content item (Just make sure you don't inherit ContentPartRecord in your record object). If you simply want to add a record with no part or content item, then the code in UpdateFrom1 used by Ben Power would work for creating a record. (But migration part would have to be changed, taking out the content item and part, and manually setting the Id to be a primary key for the record)

Related

How to attach pdf from trigger to an object?

I'm a bit lost trying to attach a pdf with populated values from an opportunity record
Here is the code:
Trigger:
trigger OpportunityTrigger on Opportunity (after insert)
if(trigger.isAfter && trigger.isUpdate) {
opportunityTriggerHelper.attachFileToOpportunityRecord(trigger.new);
}
Helper Class:
private void attachFileToOpportunityRecord(List<Opportunity> lstOpp) {
List<Id> oppListIdsForAttach = new List<Id>();
for(Opportunity opp : lstOpp) {
oppListIdsForAttach .add(opp.Id);
}
attachFileToOpportunities(oppListIdsForAttach);
}
#future(callout=true)
private static void attachFileToOppotunities(List<Id> OpportunityIds) {
List<Attachment> attachList = new List<Attachment>();
for(Id oppId : opportunityIds) {
OpportunityPdfController file = new OpportunityPdfController();
file.getData(oppId);
PageReference pdfPage = Page.PdfAttachmentForOpp;
blob pdfBody;
pdfBody = pdfPage.getContent();
Attachment attach = new Attachment();
attach.Body = pdfBody;
attach.Name = 'Pdf file';
attach.IsPrivate = false;
attach.ParenId = oppId;
attachList.add(attach);
}
insert attachList;
}
VF Page:
<apex:page controller="OpportunityPdfController" renderAs="pdf">
<apex:repeat value="{!pricingDetails}" var="pd">
<apex:outputText>{!pd.basePrice}</apex:outputText>
</apex:repeat>
</apex:page>
VF Page Controller:
public with sharing class OpportunityPdfController {
public List<PricingDetailWrapper> pricingDetails {get;set;}
public void getData(Id opportunityId) {
List<Pricing_Detail__c> pdList = [
SELECT basePrice
FROM Pricing_Detail__c
WHERE OpportunityId =: opportunityId
];
for(Pricing_Detail__c pd : pdList) {
PricingDetailWrapper pdw = new PricingDetailWrapper();
pdw.basePrice = pd.basePrice;
pricingDetails.add(pdw);
}
}
public class PricingDetailWrapper {
public String basePrice {get;set;}
}
}
The result is whenever I update an opportunity it attaches the corresponding pdf file but it is blank and if I add for example the following to vf page body: "<h1> hello World!</h1>" this works and shows as expected, but this is not happening to what I required above.
You didn't really pass the opportunity id to the VF page. And I doubt this actually works at all? If you manually access the VF page as /apex/PdfAttachmentForOpp?id=006... does it render the content ok? I'm assuming it doesn't.
Fixing the page
You didn't specify constructor so SF generates one for you, fine. I think you need to add something like
public OpportunityPdfController(){
if(ApexPages.currentPage() != null){
Id oppId = ApexPages.currentPage().getParameters().get('id');
System.debug(oppId);
getData(oppId);
}
}
Add this, try to access the page passing valid opp id and see if it renders ok, if right stuff shows in debug log. /apex/PdfAttachmentForOpp?id=006...
(VF page constructors are bigger topic, this might be simpler with standardController + extension class)
Fixing the callout
VF page (especially accessed as callout) will not share memory with the OpportunityPdfController controller you've created in the code. New object of this class will be created to support the page and your file will be ignored. You might try to make-do with some static variable holding current opportunity's id but it feels bit yucky.
In normal execute anonymous try if this returns correct pdf:
PageReference pdfPage = Page.PdfAttachmentForOpp;
pdfPage.getParameters().put('id', '006...');
Blob pdfBody = pdfPage.getContent();
System.debug(pdfBody.toString());
If it works - use similar trick in the actual code, pass the id as url parameter.

ASP.NET Core Authentication Id?

The tutorials on enabling authentication work all right, but what identifier should be used to store data for a user in the database? The only thing easily available is User.Name, which seems to be my email address.
I see in the database there is an AspNetUsers table with that as the UserName column, and a varchar Id column that appears to be a GUID and is the primary key. It seems like the 'Id' field is the logical value to use, but it's not readily available in my app. I found I can get to it like this:
string ID_TYPE = "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity/claims/nameidentifier";
var id = User.Claims.Where(x => x.Type == ID_TYPE).Select(x => x.Value).FirstOrDefault();
But that seems like a weird way to go about it. Is that the proper value to use say if I want to create a 'Posts' table that has a user associated with a post?
I've looked at these pages and it seems that a lot of this might be due to Microsoft integrating the same login process with ActiveDirectory.
Is there a reason to make the id so hard to get to and the name so easy? Should I be using the name instead? Should I be careful not to let the user change their user name then?
The shortest path to UserId is:
User.FindFirst(ClaimTypes.NameIdentifier)?.Value;
Or create extension like so if you need to access UserId a lot:
public static class ClaimsPrincipalExtensions
{
public static string GetUserId(this ClaimsPrincipal principal)
{
if (principal == null)
return null; //throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(principal));
string ret = "";
try
{
ret = principal.FindFirst(ClaimTypes.NameIdentifier)?.Value;
}
catch (System.Exception)
{
}
return ret;
}
}
Usage:
User.GetUserId()
In your controller use dependency injection to get the user manager:
Create a class MyUser that has your extended properties
public class MyUser : IdentityUser
{
public string MyExendedInfo { get; set; }
public int MyOtherInfo {get;set;}
}
add this property to the database using migration, or manually add it.
In Startup.cs in Configure Services add:
services.AddIdentity<MyUser, IdentityRole>()
Now inject this in your controller class:
private readonly UserManager<MyUser> _userManager;
public HomeController(
UserManager<MyUser> userManager)
{
_userManager = userManager;
}
Now you can access your additional proporties and your Id (if you still need this) in your action methods like this:
var user = await _userManager.GetUserAsync(HttpContext.User);
var id = user.Id;
var myExtendedInfo = user.MyExtendedInfo;
var myOtherInfo = user.MyOtherInfo;
etc
You can also update information about your user:
user.myExtendedInfo = "some string";
user.MyOtherInfo = myDatabase.pointer;
var result = await _userManager.UpdateAsync(user);
if (!result.Succeeded)
{
//handle error
}
So as long as you want only limited additional data stored in the database, you can create a custom user class, and use the Identity system to store it for you. I would not store it myself.
If however, you need to store large information in a separate table and/or reference the user from other tables, the Id is the correct field to use and you can access it as shown above.
I don't know what the best practice is for how much information can be stored in AspNetUsers, versus in claims, versus in your own table, but since the provided table already stores things like user name, phonenumber etc, I think it is Ok to extend it like this.

Get all SmartForm items from Ektron 9 in a Taxonomy

I'm using Ektron CMS version 9.0
I have smart form content which is allocated to taxonomies e.g. I might have five smart form content items (all of same) type allocated to a taxonomy, and another three to a different taxonomy:
I need to get all content of a smart form type from a taxonomy:
public IEnumerable<T> GetListOfSmartFormFromTaxonomy<T>(long taxonomyId, bool isRecursive) where T : class
{
// TODO
}
What I have working, based on links below, is this:
public IEnumerable<TaxonomyItemData> GetListOfSmartFormFromTaxonomy(long taxonomyId)
{
TaxonomyItemCriteria criteria = new TaxonomyItemCriteria();
criteria.AddFilter(TaxonomyItemProperty.TaxonomyId, CriteriaFilterOperator.EqualTo, taxonomyId);
TaxonomyItemManager taxonomyItemManager = new TaxonomyItemManager();
List<TaxonomyItemData> taxonomyItemList = taxonomyItemManager.GetList(criteria);
return taxonomyItemList;
}
But this just gets the item's titles and ids, not the smart form data itself.
As an Ektron newbie, I don't know how to get all the items of one Smart Form type using only one call (instead of looping through each item and fetching it by ID which is not efficient)
What have I missed? I am working on this actively today and will post my findings here.
References used so far:
http://reference.ektron.com/developer/framework/Organization/TaxonomyItemManager/GetList.asp
Ektron taxonomy and library items (in v9)
EDIT
Posted my just-got-it-working solution below as an fyi and awarded closest answer as accepted. Thanks everyone for your help. Please chime in with any improvements ;)
I'd recommend using the ContentTaxonomyCriteria with the ContentManager.
long smartFormId = 42;
long taxonomyId = 127;
bool isRecursive = true;
var cm = new ContentManager();
var taxonomyCriteria = new ContentTaxonomyCriteria();
taxonomyCriteria.AddFilter(ContentProperty.XmlConfigurationId, CriteriaFilterOperator.EqualTo, smartFormId);
taxonomyCriteria.AddFilter(taxonomyId, isRecursive);
var content = cm.GetList(taxonomyCriteria);
UPDATE
The ContentData object has a property called XmlConfiguration. When the content is based on a smartform, this property will be non-null and have a positive (non-zero) Id: content[0].XmlConfiguration.Id for example.
I often add an Extension Method to my code that will tell me whether a given ContentData is based on a smart form:
public static class ContentDataExtensions
{
public static bool IsSmartFormContent(this ContentData content)
{
return content != null && content.XmlConfiguration != null && content.XmlConfiguration.Id > 0;
}
}
That way I can take a content (or list of content) and check it very quickly in code to see if it's based on a smartform or not:
foreach (var contentData in contentList)
{
if (contentData.IsSmartFormContent())
{
// Do smart-form stuff here...
}
}
Of course, if your content is coming from the framework api and you used a criteria object that is selecting based on a specific XmlConfigurationId, then in theory you wouldn't have to use that, but it still comes in handy quite often.
I'm not quite sure I understand your organizational structure, but you do have the ability to do your own sub clauses that select directly against the database.
In this case I wouldn't use the TaxonomyItemManager, I would use the ContentManager with a special criteria:
ContentManager cApi = new ContentManager();
var criteria = new ContentCriteria();
criteria.AddFilter(ContentProperty.Id, CriteriaFilterOperator.InSubClause, "select taxonomy_item_id where taxonomy_id = " + taxonomyId);
criteria.AddFilter(ContentProperty.XmlConfigurationId, CriteriaFilterOperator.EqualTo, smartformTypeId);
var yourContent = cApi.GetList(criteria);
That should do what you're asking for (grab the content specifically that is a member of a Taxonomy while only being of a specific SmartForm config). It's worth noting you don't need the second criteria piece (XmlConfigurationId) if your Taxonomy only contains that XmlConfiguration.
For Information, this is what I came up with. Noted Brian Oliver's comment on List but using patterns from other devs, can refactor later.
To clarify, we are creating classes from the XSDs generated from the smart forms, so have smart form types to play with. Your use may be simpler that ours.
public IEnumerable<T> GetListOfSmartFormFromTaxonomy<T>(long taxonomyId, bool isRecursive = false) where T : class
{
long smartFormId = GetSmartFormIdFromType(typeof(T));
// checks here for smartformid=0
ContentManager contentManager = new ContentManager();
ContentTaxonomyCriteria criteria = new ContentTaxonomyCriteria();
// Smart Form Type
criteria.AddFilter(ContentProperty.XmlConfigurationId, CriteriaFilterOperator.EqualTo, smartFormId);
// Taxonomy
criteria.AddFilter(taxonomyId, isRecursive);
List<ContentData> contentDataList = contentManager.GetList(criteria);
IEnumerable<T> smartFormList = ConvertToSmartFormList<T>(pressReleaseDataList);
return smartFormList;
}
private IEnumerable<T> ConvertToSmartFormList<T>(List<ContentData> contentDataList) where T : class
{
List<T> smartFormList = new List<T>();
if (contentDataList != null && contentDataList.Count > 0)
{
foreach (ContentData contentData in contentDataList)
{
if (contentData.IsSmartFormContent())
{
T smartForm = GetDeserializedContent<T>(contentData.Html);
if (smartForm != null)
{
PropertyInfo property = smartForm.GetType().GetProperty("ContentId");
if (property != null)
{
property.SetValue(smartForm, contentData.Id, null);
}
smartFormList.Add(smartForm);
}
}
}
}
return smartFormList;
}
private long GetSmartFormIdFromType(Type smartFormType)
{
SmartFormConfigurationManager manager = new SmartFormConfigurationManager();
SmartFormConfigurationCriteria criteria = new SmartFormConfigurationCriteria();
// Note: Smart Form Title must match the type's name, i.e. no spaces, for this to work
criteria.AddFilter(SmartFormConfigurationProperty.Title, CriteriaFilterOperator.EqualTo, smartFormType.Name);
List<SmartFormConfigurationData> configurationData = manager.GetList(criteria);
if (configurationData == null || configurationData.Count == 0)
{
return 0;
}
return configurationData.First().Id;
}

Nhibernate mapping at run time

I am developing a site in which nhibernate is using. that is working fine for static mapping. but problem that i apply this application on existing database. so is there any way that mapping of classes took place at run time. i mean user provide tables and column names for mapping. Thanks
From your question I interpret you saying that the POCO classes exists, but you don't know the table or column names at build time.
So, if you already had this class:
public class MyGenericClass
{
public virtual long Id { get; set; }
public virtual string Title { get; set; }
}
You could bind it to a table and columns at runtime:
string tableName; // Set somewhere else by user input
string idColumnName; // Set somewhere else by user input
string titleColumnName; // Set somewhere else by user input
var configuration = new NHibernate.Cfg.Configuration();
configuration.Configure();
var mapper = new NHibernate.Mapping.ByCode.ModelMapper();
mapper.Class<MyGenericClass>(
classMapper =>
{
classMapper.Table(tableName);
classMapper.Id(
myGenericClass => myGenericClass.Id,
idMapper =>
{
idMapper.Column(idColumnName);
idMapper.Generator(Generators.Identity);
}
);
classMapper.Property(c => c.Title,
propertyMapper =>
{
propertyMapper.Column(titleColumnName);
}
);
}
);
ISessionFactory sessionFactory = configuration.BuildSessionFactory();
ISession session = sessionFactory.OpenSession();
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Now we can run an SQL query over this newly specified table
//
List<MyGenericClass> items = session.QueryOver<MyGenericClass>().List();
I don't think that could be possibly with NHibernate, but you could use a workaround.
You could use a view instead a table for the NHibernate mapping.
And in runtime, you could create that View or update it with the especified user mapping you need.
For example, you define a mapping in NHibernate to a view named ViewMapped with two columns Name and Mail.
And in the other hand, the user has a table with three columns Name, SecondName, EMail.
you can create a view on runtime with the following select:
(SELECT Name + ' ' + SecondName as Name, EMail as Mail FROM tableName) AS ViewMapped
I hope that helps you, or at least leads you to a solution.

LightSwitch - bulk-loading all requests into one using a domain service

I need to group some data from a SQL Server database and since LightSwitch doesn't support that out-of-the-box I use a Domain Service according to Eric Erhardt's guide.
However my table contains several foreign keys and of course I want the correct related data to be shown in the table (just doing like in the guide will only make the key values show). I solved this by adding a Relationship to my newly created Entity like this:
And my Domain Service class looks like this:
public class AzureDbTestReportData : DomainService
{
private CountryLawDataDataObjectContext context;
public CountryLawDataDataObjectContext Context
{
get
{
if (this.context == null)
{
EntityConnectionStringBuilder builder = new EntityConnectionStringBuilder();
builder.Metadata =
"res://*/CountryLawDataData.csdl|res://*/CountryLawDataData.ssdl|res://*/CountryLawDataData.msl";
builder.Provider = "System.Data.SqlClient";
builder.ProviderConnectionString =
WebConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["CountryLawDataData"].ConnectionString;
this.context = new CountryLawDataDataObjectContext(builder.ConnectionString);
}
return this.context;
}
}
/// <summary>
/// Override the Count method in order for paging to work correctly
/// </summary>
protected override int Count<T>(IQueryable<T> query)
{
return query.Count();
}
[Query(IsDefault = true)]
public IQueryable<RuleEntryTest> GetRuleEntryTest()
{
return this.Context.RuleEntries
.Select(g =>
new RuleEntryTest()
{
Id = g.Id,
Country = g.Country,
BaseField = g.BaseField
});
}
}
public class RuleEntryTest
{
[Key]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Country { get; set; }
public int BaseField { get; set; }
}
}
It works and all that, both the Country name and the Basefield loads with Autocomplete-boxes as it should, but it takes VERY long time. With two columns it takes 5-10 seconds to load one page.. and I have 10 more columns I haven't implemented yet.
The reason it takes so long time is because each related data (each Country and BaseField) requires one request. Loading a page looks like this in Fiddler:
This isn't acceptable at all, it should be a way of combining all those calls into one, just as it does when loading the same table without going through the Domain Service.
So.. that was a lot explaining, my question is: Is there any way I can make all related data load at once or improve the performance by any other way? It should not take 10+ seconds to load a screen.
Thanks for any help or input!s
My RIA Service queries are extremely fast, compared to not using them, even when I'm doing aggregation. It might be the fact that you're using "virtual relationships" (which you can tell by the dotted lines between the tables), that you've created using your RuleEntryTest entity.
Why is your original RuleEntry entity not related to both Country & BaseUnit in LightSwitch BEFORE you start creating your RIA entity?
I haven't used Fiddler to see what's happening, but I'd try creating "real" relationships, instead of "virtual" ones, & see if that helps your RIA entity's performance.