I have a table that storing information about an event. The event has a location attribute (String). Now I have a table locations table that stores location names together with their address.
Now I want to fetch all events from the database together with their location.
Because I get all the events from an external source, I can't use ids to setup a relationship.
So what I need is a relationship that works something like $this->hasOne('Location')->where('name','LIKE','%location_name%');
Is something like this possible? If not, what would be the best practice to achieve something like this so I get an output JSON like this:
{
"name":"Event Abc",
"date":"2019-10-18 12:00:00",
"location":"Location X",
"location_details": {
"name":"Location X",
"address":"Street XYZ"
}
}
Thanks
Yes it is possible. But you need little modification. So lets try and let me know what happened
function location () {
return $this->hasOne('App\Location')->where('name','LIKE','%location_name%')->get();
}
then call it from your controller
$eventsWithlocation = Event::with('location')->first();
dd($eventsWithlocation);
Related
in my app there are many entities which get exposed by GraphQL. All that entities get Resolvers and those have many methods (I think they are called "fields" in GraphQl). Since there is only one Query type allowed, I get an "endless" list of fields which belong to many different contexts, i.E.:
query {
newsRss (...)
newsCurrent (...)
userById(...)
weatherCurrent (...)
weatherForecast(...)
# ... many more
}
As you can see, there are still 3 different contexts here: news, users and weather. Now I can go on and prefix all fields ([contextName]FieldName), as I did in the example, but the list gets longer and longer.
Is there a way to "group" some of them together, if they relate to the same context? Like so, in case of the weather context:
query {
weather {
current(...)
forecast(...)
}
}
Thanks in advance!
If you want to group them together , you need to have a type which contain all fields under the same context . Take weather as an example , you need to have a type which contain currentWeather and forecastWeather field. Does this concept make sense to your application such that you can name it easily and users will not feel strange about it ? If yes , you can change the schema to achieve your purpose.
On the other hand, if all fields of the same context actually return the same type but they just filtering different things, you can consider to define arguments in the root query field to specify the condition that you want to filter , something like :
query {
weather(type:CURRENT){}
}
and
query {
weather(type:FORECAST){}
}
to query the current weather and forecast weather respectively.
So it is a question about how you design the schema.
i have 2 tables, stores and products
stores table has field called products_ids
in this case i am saving the products in the stores by their ids in products_ids field as an array like this [1,2,3,4,5] i know it's not good practice to do it like this but this is the situation.
how can i make a relation in the model to achieve thing like this
Store::with('products')->get();
thanks
I don't know if this would work for you, but try it anyway:
in your Store model add the following:
public function products ()
{
return Product::whereIn('id', $this->products_ids)->get();
}
I have a table of users who each have an array of friends.
A document in it looks something like this:
{
id: "0ab43d81-b883-424a-be56-32f9ff98f7d2",
username: "testUser1234",
friends: [
"04423c56-1890-4028-b38a-cb9aff7112de" ,
"05e4e613-2131-408c-b0ae-a952f3007405" ,
"0395ee53-8ab0-48cc-aa4e-41aad93b8737"
]
}
I want to watch for changes on a user's friends'. A query like this will get me a list of friends:
r.db("Test").table("Users").get("0ab43d81-b883-424a-be56-32f9ff98f7d2")("friends").map(function(id) {
return r.db("Test").table("Users").get(id);
})
But, when I try to throw a .changes() on the end, RethinkDB tells me that it won't work:
RqlRuntimeError: Cannot call `changes` on an eager stream in:
r.db("Test").table("Users").get("0ab43d81-b883-424a-be56-32f9ff98f7d2")("friends").map(function(var_19) { return r.db("Test").table("Users").get(var_19); }).changes()
Is there anyway to get this to work? I am afraid that my only alternative is to subscribe to the friends list (in my app) and update the subscription to the actual friends when it changes:
r.db("Test").table("Users").getAll(friendId1, friendId2 , friendId3, friendId4).changes()
Not the end of the world, but I was really excited about being able to do it entirely in the DB.
Also, can anyone explain what an "eager stream" is? I think it has something to do with lazy vs. immediate evaluation, but I had no idea how to tell what the criteria determines whether a stream is eager or not.
I can get the query working with the following formation, inspired by this post:
r.db("Test").table('Users').getAll(r.args(
r.db('Test').table('Users').get("0ab43d81-b883-424a-be56-32f9ff98f7d2")('friends')
)).changes()
You can attach the .changes before some of the transofrmations.
r.db("Test")
.table("Users")
.get("0ab43d81-b883-424a-be56-32f9ff98f7d2")
.changes()
.getField('new_val')('friends')
.map(function(id) {
return r.db("Test").table("Users").get( id );
})
Basically, every time there is a change, the map function is executed. At the moment, that is the only way to do this type of operations with .changes, but that will change in upcoming versions of RethinkDB.
I have too classes and two non-TYPO3-tables. I defined a non-TYPO3-table as a table without uid, pid, etc. columns.
My two classes:
class Tx_Abc_Domain_Model_Location extends Tx_Extbase_DomainObject_AbstractEntity
class Tx_Abc_Domain_Model_Facility extends Tx_Extbase_DomainObject_AbstractEntity
My two tables (with columns):
locations
zipcode
city
facility_id
facilities
facility_id
name
I've mapped the attributes like this:
config.tx_extbase.persistence.classes {
Tx_Abc_Domain_Model_Location.mapping {
tableName = locations
columns {
zipcode.mapOnProperty = zipcode
city.mapOnProperty = city
facility_id.mapOnProperty = facility
}
}
Tx_Abc_Domain_Model_Facility.mapping {
tableName = facilities
columns {
facility_id.mapOnProperty = uid
name.mapOnProperty = name
}
}
}
My problem:
The facility attribute of my location model got the type Tx_Abc_Domain_Model_Facility and when I'm looking for a location via the LocationRepository it builds me a location model which contains a facility model.
The problem appears, when I the search I am doing returns several results. i.e. the location with the zipcode 12345 has two different facilities (and the table locations got two rows with different facility_ids), then I would expect to get two location models and each of it got the right facility model.
But instead I get the two location models, which have all same facility model inside. They've got all the facility of the first found location.
Even if I change the type of the facility attribute to integer, there are the wrong ids. But if I enable raw query result in repository I get the correct ids.
I get also the correct ids or models, when I add to both tables an uid-column.
Is there no possibility to map tables without uid column with Extbase models?
Thanks.
Okay, the answer to my last question is: Yes, there is no possibility to map tables without uid column with Extbase models.
There is an existing ticket on forge: http://forge.typo3.org/issues/25984
The reason seems to be the hardcoded $row['uid'] in mapSingleRow() method in Tx_Extbase_Persistence_Mapper_DataMapper class.
If it's not alot of tables you have to map, a work-around could be to create views for those tables to just map the uid.
I.e.:
CREATE VIEW tx_abc_domain_model_facility AS
SELECT facility_id AS uid, facilities.* FROM facilities;
Is there any way to use a different column for the first column in the group? By default it uses the same as the "Group Title" (the one with the "expand" triangle).
E.g. I want to bind the "Group" row to departmentTitle and the first column of the items in the group should have employeeTitle.
Like this:
-> departmentTitle
-->employeeTitle
-->employeeTitle
-->employeeTitle
-->employeeTitle
By default they use the same column like this:
-> departmentTitle
-->departmentTitle
-->departmentTitle
-->departmentTitle
-->departmentTitle
How can I change them from using the same column? I can just set it to "title" and make a return self.employeeTitle method but then I have to make that KVO compliant and mess up my model with workaround stuff. Am I missing something? Thanks
i might be late to answer this question, but here's what i did (it's not the most ellegant way of doing it, i'm certain)
you could have a property called "title" and bind the column to it.
also, define a property "departmentTitle" and "employeeTitle" which you'd initialize depending on whether an object is group or child object.
then define the "title" property's getter to return either "departmentTitle" or "employeeTitle" depending on your needs. it would look something like this:
- (NSString) title {
if (isLeaf) {
return self.employeeTitle;
}
else {
return self.departmentTitle;
}
}
as i said, it's not an ellegant solution but it worked like a charm for me.