I have noticed two things I want to avoid when updating data in my FileMaker solution through JDBC:
field calculations are run while inserting/updating data, some of which considerably slow down the update process
last-modified fields are changed (but created fields are not, even on INSERT)
So I am looking for a way to update/insert through JDBC without triggering script triggers or the "changed on/by" auto-calculation. (because I am merging data from another DB and want the change fields to represent the actual last change, not the copy).
For case #2 I have tried both the built-in checkbox of changing the field when edited, and the calculated field solution with Let ( trigger = GetField ( "" ) ; If ( $$SilentSync > 0 ; Self ; Get ( CurrentDate ) ) ) as was answered, e.g. in my related question about avoiding auto-calculations when working in the solution itself. Sadly, both get triggered (and the global variable solution doesn't avoid it) when using JDBC.
Is there a way to say "don't update this field when I change it via JDBC"? Either globally or with an improved field calculation? I've searched the official JDBC guide and Google and found nothing.
For example, what would help is if using a calculated field I can somehow determine that data was changed not through the FM solution, but through JDBC.
For anyone finding this question in the future:
The solution is actually fairly simple, modifying the code snippet I posted to check for the account name instead of a global variable. As I have made a special user for JDBC access, that works well.
Related
TLDR; is there a way to understand at runtime which format is ADF using for dates behind the scenes? In particular the format used to render dates in dynamically generated sql code?
In the Oracle ADF Application I'm working on there are several table filters (by that I mean the field over the column in which I can write text/number/dates to query the table).
Filtering this way, the framework modifies the query of the View Object, adding the appropriate where clause. On the page there's also a button "Select all" that allows me to select all the data that's rendered in the table (there is a selection checkbox).
In the specific case, the query from the VO is used to aim two different goals:
update the rendered data in the table
if I press the "select all" button a function in the backend database is called (callable statement calling the function), passing as a parameter the query.
The first task is successfully reached (as the table is visually updated), but we had an issue with the second one.
The backend function uses the query to select all the extracted data (as iterating in ADF with java would be too slow).
The problem is that the where clause isn't correctly generated for the backend database (which is also oracle).
Basically the generated WHERE clause (which was added to VO's query automatically by the framework) was
WHERE record_date = '2020-10-12'
which I had to change to
WHERE record_date = to_date('2020-10-12', 'YYYY-MM-DD')
in order to have it correctly executed by the Oracle Db.
So now it's working (yay), but my concern is: isn't it dangerous to assume the date format will be 'YYYY-MM-DD' on every application's instance?
I think this 'YYYY-MM-DD' is the format in which ADF is managing dates (as the value is written as '2020-10-12' in the query).
But is there a way to understand at runtime which format is ADF using for dates behind the scenes? Or does it always use 'YYYY-MM-DD', or am I completely off-road and the storage format is another and I should ask which format does it use to render dates? But dates on page are visually rendered in another way :/
Sorry for my lack of expertise and have a nice day!
Update
The value of the query field, which I'm getting by calling
this.getNamedWhereClauseParams().getAttribute('vc_temp_1');
is of class
oracle.jbo.domain.Date
and by printing it I obtain the date in format YYYY-MM-DD.
Would it be possible that the framework was simply using Date.toString?
This would raise another question: how can I be sure of the pattern used by Date.toString? The documentation isn't clear about it (and it says that it should be used only in development, so this is quite a remote scenario).
What you named 'Filter' is called 'Query by Example' or QBE in short. See the doc for more info.
You can change the query passed to the server using a bean method. Look at e.g. JDev 12.2.1.3: Multi select component table filter for a sample.
Using dates in ADF is always dependent on the current user's settings. If the user don'T use a specific locale the default is 'yyyy-mm-dd'. This can be changed at different points, starting by the entity objects, view objects a,d finally in the UI by using converters.
The best way to use dates depends on the use case.
I am trying to delete a set of data in the target table based on a column (year) from the lookup in IICS (Informatica Cloud).
I want to solve this problem using pre/post sql commands but the constraint is I can't pass year column to my query.
I tried this:
delete from sample_db.tbl_emp where emp_year = {year}
I want to delete all the employees in a specific year i get from lookup return
For Ex:
I got year as '2019', all the records in table sample_db.tbl_emp containing emp_year=2019 must be deleted.
I am not sure how this works in informatica cloud.
Any leads would be helpful.
How are you getting the year value? A pre/post SQL may not be the way to go unless you need to do this as part of another transformation, i.e., before or after the transformation runs. Also, does your org only have ICDI, or also ICAI? ICAI may be a better solution depending on the value is being provided.
The following steps would help you achieve this.
Create an input-output parameter in your mapping.
Assign the result of your lookup in an expression transformation to the parameter using SetMaxVariable
Use the parameter in your target pre SQL as
delete from sample_db.tbl_emp where emp_year = $$parameter
Let me know if you have any further questions
I want to read from a table, change a couple column values for a few lines in a query, then update those lines on the same table.
I'm using SAP BODS, and that's what I tried:
I was about to insert images but just found out I can't insert images until 10 rep.
Anyway, I created a DataFlow where I have the same table as source and target.
A query to filter (using where) and change values (using mapping). And then a Table Comparison (where I expected those lines to be set to update, in this particular case), set table name on first entry, then PK in 'input primary key' and then the two columns I want to change in 'Compare columns'. No other changes from default that I can recall.
Got no warnings on 'validate all', and on execution I receive an ORA-00001 for the PK.
So ... I thought the Table Comparison would try to update, but seems like it's trying to insert instead. I want to know what I'm doing wrong and how could I get the job to do those updates. Thanks in advance.
Ps. I did search SO before asking and didn't find anything relevant.
Ok
So, turns out I just found what's going on a few minutes after posting the question.
Wasn't sure if I should answer my own question and took a look at this Etiquette for answering your own question
and decided to come back here and answer my own question.
For some reason I got stuck thinking that it was something to do with the Table Comparison trying to insert a line with a PK that's already there, instead of doing the update I wanted.
But after going back to the job to take another look at the issue, it occurred to me that maybe the problem could be a duplicate in the incoming data set. Made a few adjustment to filter those, and voilà.
I have a use case where i am mapping two tables to the same object.
In this object i have a string called source and I want to be able to set the table name or the database name to this variable.
Any ideas on how to achieve this?
I have thought about iterating over my list and manually setting it but this has the potential to waste a fair chunk of time.
I appreciate this is somewhat of an odd request so this may be the only way but am hoping for a solution that maps the source variable when hibernate is mapping everything else.
if i had understood correctly your issue , then your solution might be the MappedSuperClass , in which you must have an abstract class , which will have the common fields of the two tables and then you will extend that to the two entities you want , which will point to two different tables.
Check this link
You could try to achieve this with Load listener or Interceptors. In the listener/interceptor you can check what the data source is and populate the source field accordingly.
In the end i ended up using a formula to map my variable to a select statement which was sufficient for what i needed.
I am importing data from csv file in CRM2011, I was wondering if there a way to ignore a complete row, eg, if type = P then add if type = S then ignore?
Cheers
Using the Imports section of the Data Management area I think the only way you might have a chance at getting this to work is if you can control some other row value and make it invalid which would cause the entire row to fail on your type 'S' records.
Another alternative would be to use the SDK and create your own custom data mapping routine where are can have a bit more control over which records get processed.
SDK documentation
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh547396.aspx
You could encourage CRM to consider the rows you're importing to be duplicates, or to be invalid lookups. Or you could accomplish this with workflow.
For example, if you mapped your 'type' field to an attribute, then made sure you had a record where that value is set to 'S', then set up a duplication rule to not allow records with non-unique 'type'.. that might work.
Or, you could try mapping 'type' to an Option Set which doesn't have a value for 'S' in it. This might work, or it might important blank, I'm not sure.
Or, you could make a workflow to retrospectively delete records where 'type' field is 'S'.
My disclaimer would be that none of these sound like particularly good ideas to me.
EDIT: another option is edit your CSV in Excel and remove the rows you don't want. That does sound like a good idea because then you're not asking the import wizard to do anything clever.