Good Evening, I am sure this is a very simple question. But I am having no luck finding a correct answer.
I have onLoad client script on a request form. The form has a variable that I need to auto populate, the value is on a sys_user extended table.
I am not sure how to pull that value from the sys_user extended table.
I know to use a GlideRecord to get the current user on the sys_user, but after that is were I am having the issue.
Thanks for any help or suggestions you may have.
James
As you mentioned, GlideRecord should be what you need to use. The exact script will vary based off of what field you are trying to query on your extended table.
var gr = new GlideRecord("extended_table_name");
gr.addQuery("field_name", "query");
gr.query();
if (gr.next()) {//action you want to take}
You can add as many addQuery() methods as needed to build the query as specific as you require. The query() method then runs the query and return a new GlideRecord object. The .next() method checks to see if there is another record in the GlideRecord object and advances to the next record if so. After running the script above, you can access any properties on the GlideRecord you may need by simply dotwalking to them. i.e:
sys_id = gr.sys_id;
name = gr.getDisplayValue();
Related
I'm trying to find a way to save a new object if one like it doesn't already exist with a specified custom ID.
I basically need to refresh a whole bunch of data every day but each item has its own ID set somewhere else (so not a parse objectId). I therefore can't use something like the standard save function as it'll just make a new record every time.
I've thought of trying to set the objectId of an object when its first created in the DB but I can't seem to do that... (Half expected this).
I've also thought of doing the obvious - checking if an object exists using a normal query but with a few thousand objects to compare, this will be very inefficient.
Any suggestions?
Maybe there is a save function or variation where its kind of "save or create depending if an object exists with this value in this field" :)
Thank you!
PS. I'm writing this within a Cloud Job - so JavaScript
I have a form where a user enters an Id into a text field, and I then I validate said Id on the server. If the Id does not exist in the system, I display an error. I do this using async validation. If the Id does exist, however, the server will return a record from our database. I want to use those values to auto populate other fields in the form.
How would I accomplish this?
I did some searching and the closest solution I found was this other question on StackOverflow. The thing is, I want to change the value after my asycValidate logic has succeeded. I don't think I can trigger the action creator from inside asyncValidate, and I'm not aware of a way to have asyncValidate trigger a callback from inside the form component.
I was able to get it to work, by following the solutions discussed in the following thread: https://github.com/erikras/redux-form/issues/442
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 !
As far as I know, all QuickBase API calls are called using the following syntax: http://<quickbase>/db/<dbid>?
Is there a way to get the dbid field without navigating to that database table within QuickBase?
If the above is not possible, would anyone recommend anything other than creating another table that stores the IDs of the tables you want?
With the latter method, I believe I would only need to store one dbid and could pull down the rest (which I believe would still need to be user entered, but would be better than requiring them to change the code).
Thanks for the help!
API_GetSchema will return the list of dbids.
https://www.quickbase.com/db/<yourApplicationId>?act=API_GetSchema&apptoken=<yourApplicationTokenId>&fmt=flat
I am using Sql tables without rowversion or timestamp. However, I need to use Linq to update certain values in the table. Since Linq cannot know which values to update, I am using a second DataContext to retrieve the current object from database and use both the database and the actual object as Input for the Attach method like so:
Public Sub SaveCustomer(ByVal cust As Customer)
Using dc As New AppDataContext()
If (cust.Id > 0) Then
Dim tempCust As Customer = Nothing
Using dc2 As New AppDataContext()
tempCust = dc2.Customers.Single(Function(c) c.Id = cust.Id)
End Using
dc.Customers.Attach(cust, tempCust)
Else
dc.Customers.InsertOnSubmit(cust)
End If
dc.SubmitChanges()
End Using
End Sub
While this does work, I have a problem though: I am also using StoredProcedures to update some fields of Customer at certain times. Now imagine the following workflow:
Get customer from database
Set a customer field to a new value
Use a stored procedure to update another customer field
Call SaveCustomer
What happens now, is, that the SaveCustomer method retrieves the current object from the database which does not contain the value set in code, but DOES contain the value set by the stored procedure. When attaching this with the actual object and then submit, it will update the value set in code also in the database and ... tadaaaa... set the other one to NULL, since the actual object does not contain the changed made by the stored procedure.
Was that understandable?
Is there any best practice to solve this problem?
If you make changes behind the back of the ORM, and don't use concurrency checking - then you are going to have problems. You don't show what you did in step "3", but IMO you should update the object model to reflect these changes, perhaps using OUTPUT TSQL paramaters. Or; stick to object-oriented.
Of course, doing anything without concurrency checking is a good way to lose data - so my preferred option is simply "add a rowversion". Otherwise, you could perhaps read the updated object out and merge things... somehow guessing what the right data is...
If you're going to disconnect your object from one context and use another one for the update, you need to either retain the original object, use a row version, or implement some sort of hashing routine in your database and retain the hash as part of your object. Of these, I highly recommend the Rowversion option as well. Using the current value as the original value like you are trying to do is only asking for concurrency problems.