Using the Infusionsoft gem, is there a way to get all Contacts through the Infusionsoft API without a specific criteria?
Simply use the wildcard as a query parameter for the Id field:
query = {"Id" => "%"}
selected_fields = %w(Id FirstName LastName ...)
data = Infusionsoft.data_query("Contacts", 1000, 0 , query, selected_fields)
The API will return an array of hashes, each one representing the contact with the selected fields as keys.
As per yuga's comment, if you have more than 1000 contacts, you will need to add a loop for data pagination:
contacts = []
i = 0
query = {"Id" => "%"}
selected_fields = %w(Id FirstName LastName ...)
loop do
data = Infusionsoft.data_query("Contacts", 1000, i , query, selected_fields)
break if data.empty?
contacts.concat(data)
i += 1
end
Related
Suppose I have a list of strings
var data = new List<string>{"fname", "phone", "lname", "home", "home", "company", "phone", "phone"};
I would like to list all values and add index to duplicates like this
fname,
phone,
lname,
home,
home[1],
company,
phone[1],
phone[2]
or like this
fname,
phone[0],
lname,
home[0],
home[1],
company,
phone[1],
phone[2]
The both solutions would work for me.
Is that possible with Linq?
You can use LINQ GroupBy to gather the matches, and then the counting version of Select to append the indexes.
var ans = data.GroupBy(d => d).SelectMany(dg => dg.Select((d, n) => n == 0 ? d : $"{d}[{n}]"));
Using Query string OnFieldWithBoosts added different fields need to apply filter, string fields records are working fine.
For id field when I include .Add(id,2) it does not return ID based result.
When I use term then ID fields records working fine.
Now in the query section,
I have used OR condition, so when first condition satisfies, it does not check second one.
If I user AND condition, then it checks for both the condition matches.
But I need first query results and second query results concat into one result
CODE:
var result = client.Search<dynamic>(q => q
.Indices("test")
.Types("user")
.From(1)
.Size(10)
.MinScore(1.0)
.Fields("id", "createddate", "email", "modifieddate", "name", "companyname") // Result set Fields Fields
.Query(q1 =>
{
qq = (q1.ConstantScore(a => a.Filter(b => b.Term("id", searchKeyword))))
|| q1.QueryString(qs => qs.Query(searchKeyword).OnFieldsWithBoost(a => a.Add("notes",3).Add("email", 2).Add("name", 2)));
return qq;
})
);
I have a query in which I pass the search term to filter the list of Companies, either by Email or company Title which is stored in another table (TranslationTexts) as Text column for multiple locales.
The query runs fine but it is very heavy and takes time. How can I make it more efficient?
See Table Diagram Image
The query:
gm.ListData = context.Companies.ToList()
.Where(a => a.AspNetUser.Email.NullableContains(searchTerm) ||
a.TitleTranslation.TranslationTexts
.Where(b => b.Text.NullableContains(searchTerm)).Any()
).Select(c => new ListCompany
{
CompanyID = c.CompanyID,
EmailID = c.AspNetUser.Email,
Title = c.TitleTranslation.TranslationTexts.FirstOrDefault(d => d.Locale == Locale).Text
}).ToList();
I have a database with fields like firstname lastname street and searchfield. Anything that match the search field will be in my search subset here is the linq logic :
if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(searchString))
{
folders = folders.Where(p => p.SearchField.ToLower().Contains(searchString.ToLower()));
}
I can order it by name or firstname or whatever.
Now I would like to present the results so it prioritize the name field in relation to my search term.
For example if i look for Schmid i want to show first the people with the LastName that match Schmid then the firstname then the street ...etc
Any idea ?
I hope I understood it correctly
var res =
folders
.Where(item => item.FirstName == name)
.Union(folders.Where(item => item.LastName == name))
/* Add more Union-Where statements */
;
I think the best approach is to get the matching objects first and then proceed in memory:
var lower = searchString.ToLower();
folders = folders
.Where(p => p.SearchField.ToLower().Contains(lower))
.ToArray();
folders = folders
.OrderBy(f => !f.LastName.Contains(lower))
.ThenBy(f => !f.FistName.Contains(lower))
.ThenBy(f => !f. ...
If you do all the OrderBy's on the IQueryable the query will probably blow up, while the initial filter is the most important thing to use the database engine for.
Note that you cannot always show the items that match lower in LastName and then those with a match in FistName etc., because there may be items that have a match in both. I don't think you want to duplicate items, do you?
I need a Linq statement that will select all from a table where a field contains all elements in a list<String> while searching other fields for the entire string regardless of words.
It's basically just a inclusive word search on a field where all words need to be in the record and string search on other fields.
Ie I have a lookup screen that allows the user to search AccountID or Detail for the entire search string, or search clientID for words inclusive words, I'll expand this to the detail field if I can figure out the ClientId component.
The complexity is that the AccountId and Detail are being searched as well which Basically stops me from doing the foreach in the second example due to the "ors".
Example 1, this gives me an the following error when I do query.Count() afterwards:
query.Count(); 'query.Count()' threw an exception of type 'System.NotSupportedException' int {System.NotSupportedException}
+base {"Local sequence cannot be used in LINQ to SQL implementations of query operators except the Contains operator."} System.SystemException {System.NotSupportedException}
var StrList = searchStr.Split(' ').ToList();
query = query.Where(p => p.AccountID.Contains(searchStr) || StrList.All(x => p.clientID.Contains(x)) || p.Detail.Contains(searchStr));
Example 2, this gives me an any search word type result:
var StrList = searchStr.Split(' ').ToList();
foreach (var item in StrList)
query = query.Where(p => p.AccountID.Contains(searchStr) || p.clientID.Contains(item) || p.Detail.Contains(searchStr));
Update
I have a table with 3 fields, AccountID, ClientId, Details
Records
Id, AccountID, CLientId, Details
1, "123223", "bobo and co", "this client suxs"
2, "654355", "Jesses hair", "we like this client and stuff"
3, "456455", "Microsoft", "We love Mircosoft"
Search examples
searchStr = "232"
Returns Record 1;
searchStr = "bobo hair"
Returns no records
searchStr = "bobo and"
Returns Record 1
searchStr = "123 bobo and"
Returns returns nothing
The idea here is:
if the client enters a partial AccountId it returns stuff,
if the client wants to search for a ClientId they can type and cancel down clients by search terms, ie word list. due to the large number of clients the ClientID Will need to contain all words (in any order)
I know this seems strange but it's just a simple interface to find accounts in a powerful way.
I think there are 2 solutions to your problem.
One is to count the results in memory like this:
int count = query.ToList().Count();
The other one is to not use All in your query:
var query2 = query;
foreach (var item in StrList)
{
query2 = query2.Where(p => p.clientID.Contains(item));
}
var result = query2.Union(query.Where(p => p.AccountID.Contains(searchStr) || p.Detail.Contains(searchStr)));
The Union at the end acts like an OR between the 2 queries.