I'm trying to create a form that has two tabs, each with a DataGrid with a different filter on it. I've created the filters as such:
ObservableCollection<ParcelVoucherDetails> _voucherDetails = new ObservableCollection<ParcelVoucherDetails>();
CollectionView cvFreightOut = new CollectionView(_voucherDetails);
cvFreightOut.Filter += FreightOutFilter;
dgFreightOut.ItemsSource = cvFreightOut;
CollectionView cvFreightIn = new CollectionView(_voucherDetails);
cvFreightIn.Filter += FreightInFilter;
dgFreightIn.ItemsSource = cvFreightIn;
I then created the filters as such:
public bool FreightOutFilter(object o)
{
ParcelVoucherDetails p = o as ParcelVoucherDetails;
if (p != null)
{
return (p.Type == "Freight Out");
}
return false;
}
public bool FreightInFilter(object o)
{
ParcelVoucherDetails p = o as ParcelVoucherDetails;
if (p != null)
{
return (p.Type == "Freight In");
}
return false;
}
Now, here's where it gets annoying. During a later event, when I add items to the ObservableCollection, I can see the filters firing and accepting or denying the filter as expected, but ALL the items still appear on both DataGrids.
I've tried using CollectionViewSource, and that also doesn't work. The only way I can get any filtering to work at all is to skip the ObservableCollection and use a DataTable with DataViews. I'd like to avoid that here, because of the convenience in the rest of the code for using the ObservableCollection.
Has anyone seen this actually work, and if so, how?
I finally found it after banging my head on the wall. I feel ridiculous right now, but I had to share the solution:
ListCollectionView cvFO = new ListCollectionView(_voucherDetails);
cvFO.Filter += FreightOutFilter;
dgFreightOut.ItemsSource = cvFO;
ListCollectionView cvFI = new ListCollectionView(_voucherDetails);
cvFI.Filter += FreightInFilter;
dgFreightIn.ItemsSource = cvFI;
This sets the filters separately. Apparently, using a generic CollectionView instead of a ListCollectionView is a no-no. :)
Related
_context.Update(v) ;
_context.SaveChanges();
When I use this code then SQL Server adds a new record instead of updating the
current context
[HttpPost]
public IActionResult PageVote(List<string> Sar)
{
string name_voter = ViewBag.getValue = TempData["Namevalue"];
int count = 0;
foreach (var item in Sar)
{
count = count + 1;
}
if (count == 6)
{
Vote v = new Vote()
{
VoteSarparast1 = Sar[0],
VoteSarparast2 = Sar[1],
VoteSarparast3 = Sar[2],
VoteSarparast4 = Sar[3],
VoteSarparast5 = Sar[4],
VoteSarparast6 = Sar[5],
};
var voter = _context.Votes.FirstOrDefault(u => u.Voter == name_voter && u.IsVoted == true);
if (voter == null)
{
v.IsVoted = true;
v.Voter = name_voter;
_context.Add(v);
_context.SaveChanges();
ViewBag.Greeting = "رای شما با موفقیت ثبت شد";
return RedirectToAction(nameof(end));
}
v.IsVoted = true;
v.Voter = name_voter;
_context.Update(v);
_context.SaveChanges();
return RedirectToAction(nameof(end));
}
else
{
return View(_context.Applicants.ToList());
}
}
You need to tell the DbContext about your entity. If you do var vote = new Vote() vote has no Id. The DbContext see this and thinks you want to Add a new entity, so it simply does that. The DbContext tracks all the entities that you load from it, but since this is just a new instance, it has no idea about it.
To actually perform an update, you have two options:
1 - Load the Vote from the database in some way; If you get an Id, use that to find it.
// Loads the current vote by its id (or whatever other field..)
var existingVote = context.Votes.Single(p => p.Id == id_from_param);
// Perform the changes you want..
existingVote.SomeField = "NewValue";
// Then call save normally.
context.SaveChanges();
2 - Or if you don't want to load it from Db, you have to manually tell the DbContext what to do:
// create a new "vote"...
var vote = new Vote
{
// Since it's an update, you must have the Id somehow.. so you must set it manually
Id = id_from_param,
// do the changes you want. Be careful, because this can cause data loss!
SomeField = "NewValue"
};
// This is you telling the DbContext: Hey, I control this entity.
// I know it exists in the DB and it's modified
context.Entry(vote).State = EntityState.Modified;
// Then call save normally.
context.SaveChanges();
Either of those two approaches should fix your issue, but I suggest you read a little bit more about how Entity Framework works. This is crucial for the success (and performance) of your apps. Especially option 2 above can cause many many issues. There's a reason why the DbContext keep track of entities, so you don't have to. It's very complicated and things can go south fast.
Some links for you:
ChangeTracker in Entity Framework Core
Working with Disconnected Entity Graph in Entity Framework Core
Using Entity Framework, I am updating about 300 rows, and 9 columns about every 30 seconds. Below is how I am currently doing it. My question is, how can I make the code more efficient?
Every once in a while, I feel my database gets hit with the impact and I just want to make it as efficient as possible.
// FOREACH OF MY 300 ROWS
var original = db.MarketDatas.FirstOrDefault(x => x.BBSymbol == targetBBsymbol);
if (original != null)
{
//if (original.BBSymbol.ToUpper() == "NOH7 INDEX")
//{
// var x1 = 1;
//}
original.last_price = marketDataItem.last_price;
original.bid = marketDataItem.bid;
original.ask = marketDataItem.ask;
if (marketDataItem.px_settle_last_dt_rt != null)
{
original.px_settle_last_dt_rt = marketDataItem.px_settle_last_dt_rt;
}
if (marketDataItem.px_settle_actual_rt != 0)
{
original.px_settle_actual_rt = marketDataItem.px_settle_actual_rt;
}
original.chg_on_day = marketDataItem.chg_on_day;
if (marketDataItem.prev_close_value_realtime != 0)
{
original.prev_close_value_realtime = marketDataItem.prev_close_value_realtime;
}
if (marketDataItem.px_settle_last_dt_rt != null)
{
DateTime d2 = (DateTime)marketDataItem.px_settle_last_dt_rt;
if (d1.Day == d2.Day)
{
//market has settled
original.settled = "yes";
}
else
{
//market has NOT settled
original.settled = "no";
}
}
if (marketDataItem.updateTime.Year != 1)
{
original.updateTime = marketDataItem.updateTime;
}
db.SaveChanges();
}
Watching what is being hit in the debugger...
SELECT TOP (1)
[Extent1].[MarketDataID] AS [MarketDataID],
[Extent1].[BBSymbol] AS [BBSymbol],
[Extent1].[Name] AS [Name],
[Extent1].[fut_Val_Pt] AS [fut_Val_Pt],
[Extent1].[crncy] AS [crncy],
[Extent1].[fut_tick_size] AS [fut_tick_size],
[Extent1].[fut_tick_val] AS [fut_tick_val],
[Extent1].[fut_init_spec_ml] AS [fut_init_spec_ml],
[Extent1].[last_price] AS [last_price],
[Extent1].[bid] AS [bid],
[Extent1].[ask] AS [ask],
[Extent1].[px_settle_last_dt_rt] AS [px_settle_last_dt_rt],
[Extent1].[px_settle_actual_rt] AS [px_settle_actual_rt],
[Extent1].[settled] AS [settled],
[Extent1].[chg_on_day] AS [chg_on_day],
[Extent1].[prev_close_value_realtime] AS [prev_close_value_realtime],
[Extent1].[last_tradeable_dt] AS [last_tradeable_dt],
[Extent1].[fut_notice_first] AS [fut_notice_first],
[Extent1].[updateTime] AS [updateTime]
FROM [dbo].[MarketDatas] AS [Extent1]
WHERE ([Extent1].[BBSymbol] = #p__linq__0) OR (([Extent1].[BBSymbol] IS NULL) AND (#p__linq__0 IS NULL))
It seems it updates the same thing multiple times, if I am understanding it correctly.
UPDATE [dbo].[MarketDatas]
SET [last_price] = #0, [chg_on_day] = #1, [updateTime] = #2
WHERE ([MarketDataID] = #3)
UPDATE [dbo].[MarketDatas]
SET [last_price] = #0, [chg_on_day] = #1, [updateTime] = #2
WHERE ([MarketDataID] = #3)
You can reduce this to 2 round trips.
Don't call SaveChanges() in side the loop. Move it outside and call it after you are done processing everything.
Write the select in such a way that it retrieves all the originals in one go and pushes them to a memory collection, then retrieve from that for each item you are updating/inserting.
code
// use this as your source
// to retrieve an item later use TryGetValue
var originals = db.MarketDatas
.Where(x => arrayOftargetBBsymbol.Contains(x.BBSymbol));
.ToDictionary(x => x.BBSymbol, y => y);
// iterate over changes you want to make
foreach(var change in changes){
MarketData original = null;
// is there an existing entity
if(originals.TryGetValue(change.targetBBsymbol, out original)){
// update your original
}
}
// save changes all at once
db.SaveChanges();
You could only execute "db.SaveChanges" after your foreach loop. It think it you would do exactly what your are asking for.
It seems it updates the same thing multiple times, if I am
understanding it correctly.
Entity Framework performs a database round-trip for every entity to update.
Just check the parameter value, they will be different.
how can I make the code more efficient
The major problem is your current solution is not scalable.
It works well when you only have a few entities to update but will become worse and worse are the number of items to update in a batch will increase.
It's often better to make this kind of logic all in the database, but perhaps you cannot do it.
Disclaimer: I'm the owner of the project Entity Framework Extensions
This library can make your code more efficient by allowing you to save multiples entities at once. All bulk operations are supported:
BulkSaveChanges
BulkInsert
BulkUpdate
BulkDelete
BulkMerge
BulkSynchronize
Example:
// Easy to use
context.BulkSaveChanges();
// Easy to customize
context.BulkSaveChanges(bulk => bulk.BatchSize = 100);
// Perform Bulk Operations
context.BulkDelete(customers);
context.BulkInsert(customers);
context.BulkUpdate(customers);
// Customize Primary Key
context.BulkMerge(customers, operation => {
operation.ColumnPrimaryKeyExpression =
customer => customer.Code;
});
I'm successfully creating a Sharepoint List (named "XMLToPDFTestList"), which I can see via Site Actions > View All Site Content, but my attempts to add columns to the list has so far proven fruitless.
Here is how I'm trying to do it:
private void ProvisionallyCreateList()
{
SPWeb mySite = SPContext.Current.Web;
// Check to see if list already exists; if so, exit
if (mySite.Lists.TryGetList(listTitle) != null) return;
SPListCollection lists = mySite.Lists;
SPListTemplateType listTemplateType = new SPListTemplateType();
listTemplateType = SPListTemplateType.GenericList;
string listDescription = "This list is to hold inputted vals";
lists.Add(listTitle, listDescription, listTemplateType);
// Now add a couple of columns
SPList list = lists["XMLToPDFTestList"];
string faveNum = list.Fields.Add("favoriteNumber", SPFieldType.Text, false);
list.Fields[faveNum].Description = "favorite number";
list.Fields[faveNum].Update();
string faveCol = list.Fields.Add("favoriteColor", SPFieldType.Text, false);
list.Fields[faveCol].Description = "favorite color";
list.Fields[faveCol].Update();
}
This is all I see when I click "XMLToPDFTestList":
My "gut feeling" is that this line:
SPList list = lists["XMLToPDFTestList"];
...is not right/not specific enough. Instead of "XMLToPDFTestList" it should be something else/prepend something, or so. But what, exactly?
It was, as is so often the case, "my bad" (YMMV?).
The problem is in my list item creation code which, because I was not assigning anything to the default/inherited "Title" field, made it appear to me (as in the scream shot above) that no item was being added.
Once I fixed the code, by changing this:
private void SaveInputToList()
{
using (SPSite site = new SPSite(siteUrl))
{
using (SPWeb web = site.RootWeb)
{
SPList list = web.Lists[listTitle];
SPListItem SPListItemFaveNum = list.Items.Add();
SPListItemFaveNum["favoriteNumber"] = "7"; //inputtedNumber; TODO: Once 7 and teal are being saved and retrieved successfully, assign the var vals - will need to declare the controls created in CreateChildControls() globally
SPListItemFaveNum.Update();
SPListItem SPListItemFaveHue = list.Items.Add();
SPListItemFaveHue["favoriteColor"] = "teal";
SPListItemFaveHue.Update();
}
}
}
...to this:
private void SaveInputToList()
{
using (SPSite site = new SPSite(siteUrl))
{
using (SPWeb web = site.RootWeb)
{
SPList list = web.Lists[listTitle];
SPListItem spli = list.Items.Add();
spli["Title"] = "Write the Title";
spli["favoriteNumber"] = "7";
//SPListItemFaveNum.Update();
//SPListItem SPListItemFaveHue = list.Items.Add();
spli["favoriteColor"] = "teal";
//SPListItemFaveHue.Update();
spli.Update();
}
}
}
...it works fine: an item is added with all three values (Title, favoriteNumber, and favoriteColor).
I was assuming the item wasn't being created because "Title" was blank, and I was calling update on each SPListItem, whereas all I really need to do is call Update once, and on one SPListItem, not multiple.
So I have a standard service reference proxy calss for MS CRM 2013 (i.e. right-click add reference etc...) I then found the limitation that CRM data calls limit to 50 results and I wanted to get the full list of results. I found two methods, one looks more correct, but doesn't seem to work. I was wondering why it didn't and/or if there was something I'm doing incorrectly.
Basic setup and process
crmService = new CrmServiceReference.MyContext(new Uri(crmWebServicesUrl));
crmService.Credentials = System.Net.CredentialCache.DefaultCredentials;
var accountAnnotations = crmService.AccountSet.Where(a => a.AccountNumber = accountNumber).Select(a => a.Account_Annotation).FirstOrDefault();
Using Continuation (something I want to work, but looks like it doesn't)
while (accountAnnotations.Continuation != null)
{
accountAnnotations.Load(crmService.Execute<Annotation>(accountAnnotations.Continuation.NextLinkUri));
}
using that method .Continuation is always null and accountAnnotations.Count is always 50 (but there are more than 50 records)
After struggling with .Continutation for a while I've come up with the following alternative method (but it seems "not good")
var accountAnnotationData = accountAnnotations.ToList();
var accountAnnotationFinal = accountAnnotations.ToList();
var index = 1;
while (accountAnnotationData.Count == 50)
{
accountAnnotationData = (from a in crmService.AnnotationSet
where a.ObjectId.Id == accountAnnotationData.First().ObjectId.Id
select a).Skip(50 * index).ToList();
accountAnnotationFinal = accountAnnotationFinal.Union(accountAnnotationData).ToList();
index++;
}
So the second method seems to work, but for any number of reasons it doesn't seem like the best. Is there a reason .Continuation is always null? Is there some setup step I'm missing or some nice way to do this?
The way to get the records from CRM is to use paging here is an example with a query expression but you can also use fetchXML if you want
// Query using the paging cookie.
// Define the paging attributes.
// The number of records per page to retrieve.
int fetchCount = 3;
// Initialize the page number.
int pageNumber = 1;
// Initialize the number of records.
int recordCount = 0;
// Define the condition expression for retrieving records.
ConditionExpression pagecondition = new ConditionExpression();
pagecondition.AttributeName = "address1_stateorprovince";
pagecondition.Operator = ConditionOperator.Equal;
pagecondition.Values.Add("WA");
// Define the order expression to retrieve the records.
OrderExpression order = new OrderExpression();
order.AttributeName = "name";
order.OrderType = OrderType.Ascending;
// Create the query expression and add condition.
QueryExpression pagequery = new QueryExpression();
pagequery.EntityName = "account";
pagequery.Criteria.AddCondition(pagecondition);
pagequery.Orders.Add(order);
pagequery.ColumnSet.AddColumns("name", "address1_stateorprovince", "emailaddress1", "accountid");
// Assign the pageinfo properties to the query expression.
pagequery.PageInfo = new PagingInfo();
pagequery.PageInfo.Count = fetchCount;
pagequery.PageInfo.PageNumber = pageNumber;
// The current paging cookie. When retrieving the first page,
// pagingCookie should be null.
pagequery.PageInfo.PagingCookie = null;
Console.WriteLine("#\tAccount Name\t\t\tEmail Address");while (true)
{
// Retrieve the page.
EntityCollection results = _serviceProxy.RetrieveMultiple(pagequery);
if (results.Entities != null)
{
// Retrieve all records from the result set.
foreach (Account acct in results.Entities)
{
Console.WriteLine("{0}.\t{1}\t\t{2}",
++recordCount,
acct.EMailAddress1,
acct.Name);
}
}
// Check for more records, if it returns true.
if (results.MoreRecords)
{
// Increment the page number to retrieve the next page.
pagequery.PageInfo.PageNumber++;
// Set the paging cookie to the paging cookie returned from current results.
pagequery.PageInfo.PagingCookie = results.PagingCookie;
}
else
{
// If no more records are in the result nodes, exit the loop.
break;
}
}
First, you have to know that I am developing my project with Struts (J2EE
Here is my problem :
I have 2 dijit.form.Select widgets in my page, and those Select are filled with the same list (returned by a Java class).
When I select an option in my 1st "Select widget", I would like to update my 2nd Select widget, and disable the selected options from my 1st widget (to prevent users to select the same item twice).
I succeed doing this (I'll show you my code later), but my problem is that when I open my 2nd list, even once, it will never be refreshed again. So I can play a long time with my 1st Select, and choose many other options, the only option disabled in my 2nd list is the first I've selected.
Here is my JS Code :
function removeSelectedOption(){
var list1 = dijit.byId("codeModif1");
var list2 = dijit.byId("codeModif2");
var list1SelectedOptionValue = list1.get("value");
if(list1SelectedOptionValue!= null){
list2.reset();
for(var i = 0; i < myListSize; i++){
// If the value of the current option = my selected option from list1
if(liste2.getOptions(i).value == list1SelectedOptionValue){
list2.getOptions(i).disabled = true;
} else {
list2.getOptions(i).disabled = false;
}
}
}
Thanks for your help
Regards
I think you have to reset() the Select after you've updated its options' properties. Something like:
function removeSelectedOption(value)
{
var list2 = dijit.byId("codeModif2"),
prev = list2.get('value');
for(var i = 0; i < myListSize; i++)
{
var opt = myList[i];
opt.disabled = opt.value === value;
list2.updateOption(opt);
}
list2.reset();
// Set selection again, unless it was the newly disabled one.
if(prev !== value) list2.set('value', prev);
};
(I'm assuming you have a myList containing the possible options here, and the accompanying myListSize.)