Kotlin Flow has a function distinctUntilChanged(old, new -> Boolean) which can be used with Android Room database to compare the table rows before and after a write operation (source code).
Is there any way to access old and new parameter objects outside of the distinctUntilChanged block?
Background: I want to check whether a record has been added or deleted from my room database by comparing size of old and new in a flow onEach{} block and action based on result.
Related
I have a Case View which shows all the records that were created by the me (My Cases view). I now want to all those Cases edited/modified by me to be visible in that view. The problem is those modified by me could be later modified by the system when a workflow updates the Case, which changes the Modified By User data. Thus, not allowing me to use Modified By (Current User) as a condition for the view.
Is there any other way or condition which I can use to make sure the I can accomplish this?
Thank you in advance.
You may create a new Entity with One to Many relationship with Case Entity. Whenever there is Insert or Update you can add a new record in the mapping entity with Modified By Information and Created On OOB.
You can create a view in the new entity with record modified by Me.
P.S - Single case record will be edited multiple times with multiple users so it will result in high volume of data and may want to look for archiving strategy.
In the salesInvoice ssrs Report i have added a table called carTableEquipTmp which is not there by default, which I insert into along with the other tables(SalesinvoiceTmp and SalesinvoiceHeaderFooterTmp) in SalesInvoiceDP.InsertIntoSalesInvoiceTmp().
Even though my table carTableEquipTmp is getting successfully inserted into, the data doesn't show up on the report if i print a proforma report.
If i add test values to the carTableEquipTmp table in SalesInvoiceDP.processReport() they show up on the proforma invoice, but there's no way for me to get any parameters needed to set in the correct data into the table at this point. If i stop at this point in the debugger none of the data is present because processreport() is being called from a lower level in the code.
I think it might be a problem with maybe pack/unpack or that the proforma code runs from a server instance as the code run when it is proforma is quite different.
I can see that SalesInvoiceJournalPostBase.CreateReportData() creates an instance of salesInvoiceDP
salesInvoiceDP = new SalesInvoiceDP();
salesInvoiceDP.parmDataContract(salesInvoiceContract);
salesInvoiceDP.parmUserConnection(new UserConnection(true));
salesInvoiceDP.createData();
And that this might have something to do with it... but i still cant get the data i want in the carTableEquipTmp table.
So any idea on how to make Ax 2012 accept this new table i have added as it gets inserted into just like the other tables and there seems to be no problem...
I hope you guys can help.
The SalesInvoice report has two data classes you need to look at for the data provider, SalesInvoiceDP and SalesInvoiceDPBase. SalesInvoiceDPBase extends SrsReportDataProviderPreProcess, so there are a couple extra steps you need to take in order to add new datasources to the report.
In the salesInvoiceDP class, there is a method called useExistingReportData(), which re-inserts the pro-forma temp table data under a user connection, so the SrsReportDataProviderPreProcess framework will pick it up in your report. When the pro-forma process creates the report data, it doesn't insert with a user connection so it doesn't get added to the report. This method only gets called when the report is being run pro-forma.
You will need to add your temp table to this method, and follow the pattern for the other tables, so your code will look something like this:
//this is different from the buffer you insert your data with
CarTableEquipTmp localCarTableEquipTmp;
...
recordList = new RecordSortedList(tableNum(carTableEquipTmp));
recordList.sortOrder(fieldNum(carTableEquipTmp, RecId));
//You will need to add a field to relate your temp table
//to the current invoice journal, and insert it in
//InsertIntoSalesInvoiceTmp() if thats where you're inserting your table.
while select localCarTableEquipTmp
where localCarTableEquipTmp.JournalRecId == jourRecId
{
recordList.ins(localCarTableEquipTmp);
}
delete_from localCarTableEquipTmp
where localCarTableEquipTmp.JournalRecId == jourRecId;
recordList.insertDatabase(this.parmUserConnection());
This method re-inserts your data under the framework and deletes the original data. The data that was re-inserted will then get picked up by the framework and show in your report. If you open CarTableEquipTmp in the table browser, you will most likely see data still there from all the times you have tried running the report. This is why we have the delete_from operation after we re-insert the data. When data is inserted under a userConnection, it is automatically deleted when the report is finished
The other method you will want to modify is SalesInvoiceDP.setTableConnections(), and you will just need to add the following line:
CarTableEquipTmp.setConnection(this.parmUserConnection());
This will set the user connection for your table when running regular (not pro-forma). You will probably want to delete the data that is stored currently in your temp table using alt+F9 from the table browser.
Other than that it's all standard RDP stuff, but it sounds like you have that part working fine. Your temp table must be of type "Regular" for this to work.
There is custom field "Lock Flag" in Account BC, namely in S_ORG_EXT_X table. This field is made available in Opportunity BC using join to above table. The join specification is as follows: Opportunity.Account Id = Account.Id. Account Id is always populated when creating new opportunity. The requirement is that for newly created records in Opportunity BC if "Lock Flag" is equal to 'Y', then we should not allow to create the record and we should show custom error message.
My initial proposal was to use a Runtime Event that is calling Data Validation Manager business service where validation rule is evaluated and error message shown. Assuming that we have to decide whether to write record or not, the logic should be placed in PreWriteRecord event handler as long as WriteRecord have row already commited to database.
The main problem was how to determine if it is new record or updated one. We have WriteRecordNew and WriteRecordUpdated runtime events but they are fired after record is actually written so it doesn't prevent user from saving record. My next approach was to use eScript: write custom code in BusComp_PreWriteRecord server script and call BC's method IsNewRecordPending to determine if it is new record, then check the flag and show error message if needed.
But unfortunately I am faced with another problem. That joined field "Lock Flag" is not populated for newly created opportunity records. Remember we are talking about BC Opportunity and field is placed in S_ORG_EXT_X table. When we create new opportunity we pick account that it belongs to. So it reproduceable: OpportunityBC.GetFieldValue("Lock Flag") returns null for newly created record and returns correct value for the records that was saved previously. For newly created opportunities we have to re-query BC to see "Lock Flag" populated. I have found several documents including Oracle's recomendation to use PreDefaultValue property if we want to display joined field value immediately after record creation. The most suitable expression that I've found was Parent: BCName.FieldName but it is not the case, because active BO is Opportunity and Opportunity BC is the primary one.
Thanks for your patience if you read up to here and finally come my questions:
Is there any way to handle PreWrite event and determine if it is new record or not, without using eScript and BC.IsNewRecordPending method?
How to get value of joined field for newly created record especially in PreWriteRecord event handler?
It is Siebel 8.1
UPDATE: I have found an answer for the first part of my question. Now it seems so simple to me that I am wondering how I haven't done it initially. Here is the solution.
Create Runtime Event triggered on PreWriteRecord. Specify call to Data Validation Manager business service.
In DVM create a ruleset and a rule where condition is
NOT(BCHasRows("Opportunity", "Opportunity", "[Id]='"+[Id]+"'", "AllView"))
That's it. We are searching for record wth the same Row Id. If it is new record there should't be anything in database yet (remember that we are in PreWriteRecord handler) and function returns FALSE. If we are updating some row then we get TRUE. Reversing result with NOT we make DVM raise an error for new records.
As for second part of my question credits goes to #RanjithR who proposed to use PickMap to populate joined field (see below). I have checked that method and it works fine at least when you have appropriate PickMap.
We Siebel developers have used scripting to correctly determine if record is new. One non scripting way you could try is to use RuntimeEvents to set a profileattribute during the BusComp NewRecord event, then check that in the PreWrite event to see if the record is new. However, there is always a chance that user might undo a record, those scenarios are tricky.
Another option, try invokine the BC Method:IsNewRecordPending from RunTime event. I havent tried this.
For the second part of the query, I think you could easily solve your problem using a PickMap.
On Opportunity BC, when your pick Account, just add one more pickmap to pick the Locked flag from Account and set it to the corresponding field on Opportunity BC. When the user picks the Account, he will also pick the lock flag, and your script will work in PreWriteRecord.
May I suggest another solution, again, I haven't tried it.
When new records are created, the field ModificationNumber will be set to 0. Every time you modify it, the ModificationNumber will increment by 1.
Set a DataValidationManager ruleset, trigger it from PreSetFieldValue event of Account field on Opportunity BC. Check for the LockFlag = Y AND (ModificationNumber IS NULL OR ModificationNumber = 0)) and throw error. DVM should throw error when new records are created.
Again, best practices say don't use the ModNumbers. You could set a ProfileAttribute to signal NewRecord, then use that attribute in the DVM. But please remember to clear the value of ProfileAttribute in WriteRecord and UndoRecord.
Let us know how it went !
Simple parent/child scenario like Order and OrderLineItems. I am inserting a new Order, the OrderID is an identity column (sql server). I'm also inserting OrderLineItems in the same SaveChanges transaction. I need to get the new OrderID into the OrderLineItems, but not sure how to do it. I have the appropriate FK relationships setup properly. When I save, I get an error that OrderID is a required field in OrderLineItems.
Will I have to split this out into 2 server calls? First to insert the Order, which will return the OrderID. And then another to insert the OrderLineItems?
The Breeze documentation discusses this topic (key generation) at several points including but not limited to: http://www.breezejs.com/documentation/save-changes, http://www.breezejs.com/documentation/extending-entities and http://www.breezejs.com/documentation/add-new-entity.
The basic idea idea is that providing that your model and metadata are set up properly, breeze can assign a temporary id in place of the identity column for use in linking your order and orderlineitem entities prior to being saved. As part of the save process, Breeze updates these temporary keys to their "real" key values and updates the local cache as well upon successful completion of the save.
I have a set of data created by another app and stored in XML format on disk. Since this data is managed by this other app, I don't want to bother with loading this data into a Core Data store for two reasons: 1) it would be redundant storage of the same data, and 2) I would have to constantly update my own Core Data store to match updates in the XML file produced by the other app.
However, I have data created in my own app that needs to be associated with the data from the XML from the other app, and I want to save the data created in my own app to disk.
To accomplish this, the XML data from the other app has persistent, unique IDs associated with each object stored in the XML file. I store these unique IDs in my own Core Data store. Upon every launch of my app, I load the XML data created by the other app, and then I can access the corresponding data in my own app via Core Data by issuing a fetch request for managed objects matching the unique ID.
OtherAppObjects represents items loaded from the XML data. They have their own unique properties in addition to the uniqueID. These OtherAppObjects are controlled by an NSArrayController. Then I have MyManagedObjects which are loaded from the Core Data store, and have distinct unique properties in addition to a uniqueID.
I have a table view which needs to display properties from both the OtherAppObjects as well as the MyManagedObjects, so I want to be able to access and set properties of the MyManagedObjects via bindings from the OtherAppObjects. Thus, I figured that I could create a correspondingMyManagedObject property of the OtherAppObjects, and then I'd be able to access the Core Data properties of the MyManagedObject via bindings.
For example, if I wanted to display property "foo" of the OtherAppObjects, and "bar" of the MyManagedObjects in the table view, I could simply bind one table column to the NSArrayController with a model key path of "foo", and bind the second table column to the model key path of "correspondingMyManagedObject.bar".
This works when not dealing with multiple threads, or when passing around a single managed object context. But since that's "strongly discouraged", I wanted to try to do this the right way by passing around a single persistent store coordinator, but creating separate managed object contexts.
However, this breaks down. The problem is that when the table view attempts to access the bar property, it needs to first access the correspondingMyManagedObject property. So, the OtherAppObject dutifully creates a new managed object context and a corresponding fetch request with the appropriate uniqueID and returns the managed object. But in doing so, it releases the managed object context and now the managed object is no longer valid, so the table view can't access the bar property!
I see only two ways around this, and I wanted to verify that there isn't another easier way to do this:
Load the objects from the XML data into my own Core Data store. In essence, create ManagedOtherAppObjects from the OtherAppObjects, with a relationship to the MyManagedObjects, and then accessing via bindings will be peachy. However, this means there's redundant storage of the same data on disk, and I'll have to recreate the ManagedOtherAppObjects every single time I launch the app (because the XML file is updated fairly frequently).
Create custom setters/getters on the OtherAppObject class. So, for example, I'd create -(NSValue *)bar and -(void)setBar:(NSValue *)newValue methods in OtherAppObject. Then, instead of binding the table view column to the key value path "correspondingMyManagedObject.bar" of OtherAppObjects, I'd just bind it to the key path "bar" of OtherAppObjects. These methods would be able to fetch the corresponding MyManagedObject and retrieve or set the value within the managed object context, and then return the correct value.
This second method isn't particularly appealing because I'd have to create two custom methods for every single property of MyManagedObject (and for properties of other managed objects for which MyManagedObject has a relationship).
I suppose I could create the generalized methods -(NSValue *)retrieveCoreDataPropertyUsingKeyPath:(NSString *)keyPath and -(void)setCoreDataProperty:(NSValue *)newValue usingKeyPath:(NSString *)keyPath , but I'd still have to create shell setters/getters for each individual property.
[UPDATE: Hmm, maybe I could just override valueForKeyPath: and setValue:forKeyPath:, and then everything would work OK?]
Is this correct, or am I missing something?
One variation on option #1 that could be worth a try would be to set things up so that you have a single persistent store coordinator that splits the objects between two separate persistent stores. You would keep MyManagedObjects (MMO) the same, being stored separately on disk, but then the OtherAppObjects (OAO) could either be backed by some temporary store on disk (e.g. in ~/Library/Caches or something) or just by an in-memory store.
Upon launch, you would create your PSC and add the store containing the MMOs. You would then add a second store to the PSC (using -[NSPersistentStoreCoordinator addPersistentStoreWithType:configuration:URL:options:error:]), read in the XML file and create all the OAOs, and associate those objects with that store using -[NSManagedObjectContext assignObject:toPersistentStore:].
Core Data doesn't allow directly modeling relationships between objects in different stores, but you could still do the lookup via unique ID like you're doing now to associate a MMO with an OAO. The difference would be that the OAO could simply use its own managed object context to fetch the MMO, so you would be sure that the MMO would stick around at least as long as the OAO.
Then, when you quit the app, you'd either delete the temporary store in ~/Library/Caches, or if using an in-memory store, just let it disappear into the ether, leaving the other store with the MMOs intact.