is there a way to rollback a specific change. I have a button that creates a row in two different tables. I want the changes in one of the tables to be rolled back before the committing so that only the second table is committed. How would this be done? Running normal rollback rollbacks both table iterators.
Ive been trying different methods and nothing is working, Please help before I go insane.
find out the corresponding 'VO' row which you want to rollback .
#1. row.setNewRowState(Row.STATUS_INITIALIZED) ;
or
#2. row.revertRow() ;
or
#3. row.remove() ;
The closest thing to rolling back a row would probably be calling refresh on the view row with the appropriate parameters, something like this:
//Obtain app module
DCBindingContainer dcb = (DCBindingContainer) BindingContext.getCurrent().getBindingsEntry();
ApplicationModuleImpl am = (ApplicationModuleImpl) dcb.getDataControl().getDataProvider();
//Get your view
ViewObjectImpl vo = am.getMyView1;
ViewRowImpl row = vo.getCurrentRow(); //alternately use vo.findByKey to lookup a row or simply iterate through every row if dataset is sufficiently small
//rollback the row
row.refresh(Row.REFRESH_REMOVE_NEW_ROWS | Row.REFRESH_UNDO_CHANGES | Row.REFRESH_CONTAINEES);//review modes for ideal combination for use case
Note that rather than a refresh, a row.remove() would probably be sufficient for what it sounds like you are trying to do. In any case, you will need to keep track of the rows you do not want to commit.
While this solution would work, it does not sound ideal for your use case. If you never commit data in the other table, there is no reason to link it to a database table. I would probably do something like one of the following instead:
If the fields are the same in both tables (or similar) and it will be an all-at-once action, create a transient attribute on the ADF view object to denote whether or not the row is approved. Use view criteria on different instances of the view object (add to your application module twice) to display/process the rows you want. Remove not approved rows prior to committing.
If the fields needed are too different or you want to be able to handle one row at a time, make you history view object a programmatic view object with transient attributes, rather than basing it on the table/Entity. When a row is approved remove it from your history view and add it to your approved view.
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.
I'm new to Oracle Forms.
I want to be sure that an item considered "valid" as soon as inputed, at time T0 (thru When-validate-item trigger), is still valid when the relevant row is inserted (or updated) and committed at time T1, where T1-T0 could be, say, a long coffee time, during which the system status may have changed so as to invalidate the item.
I thought about coding specific item-level program unit to be called both by WVI trigger and by a higher level trigger. Which one would be best?
Is this double check a common practice in Oracle Forms?
Note: I need to double-ckeck both in case of form layouts and in master-detail layouts.
Thank you.
You don't need to double-check on normal validation. Then a when-validate-item trigger will be enough to make sure it is valid. If you need to check a field that needs also a value in another field, for example a person is a firm it needs only a lastname otherwise it needs a first and a lastname then you could use the when-validate-record trigger to check this.
If your data depends on the system date or other data that might be inserted/updated in the time between validate and commit. You should place your validation on the pre-insert and pre-update trigger. Then it will always fire just before the insert or update.
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.
I got a silly general question...
If I generate a strongly typed view of an entity and chose "edit" as scaffolding, then the view does contain every column for that table. Changing and saving the values via setting it modifierd and call db.SaveChanges() does work in the controller. So far, so good.
But if I remove just one of that columns inside the view, then saving doesn't work anymore.
Is there a rule describing this? Is it only possible to make view with every column when wanting to save the model later on? I don't want to make 90 of 100 columns "hidden"...
PS: When editing a value in another table which is connected via Foreign Key (like customer.address.STREET) saving also does not work. Does everything of the entity ADDRESS has to be inside the view? I really don't get that.
Besides that: If I create my own ViewModel containing two entities: Do they also have to hold every column of both entities? This would be a whole bunch of traffic...
Answer is: You should not use the .Modified state. Instead using the UpdateModel method works fine without every field.
Regarding the SubmitChanges order (Insert, Update, Delete), is there a way to change that order? I need to have the Deletes executed first, any updates, then any new inserts. I have a datagrid where the user can do all add, changes and updates and submit. Since each grid row must have a unique item chosen in it (via a dropdown), it's possible for the the user to delete the row, then try to utilize the deleted dropdown item in a new row, then try to update all changes and have the update fail (since the item the user wants to delete actually still exists in the database because the submit is doing the inserts first). Is there a setting where I can control the automatic update order or do I have to manually do the updates myself?
I have not tried this, but you could consider the following. First, get the ChangeSet using DataContext.ChangeSet. Then, run through the ChangeSet.Deletes calling Table<T>.DeleteOnSubmit on a new instance of your DataContext. Rinse repeat for the ChangeSet.Updates and the ChangeSet.Inserts.
Good luck.
I don't believe it's possible to do this. You would have to process the changes in the order you want, and call SubmitChanges() after each insert, update or delete. If you want the whole thing within the scope of a transaction, use the TransactionScope object.