I add a virtual column, then I filter it using "having". When I need to filter by one value, all works fine, but I also need to filter by "not null". having expects only 3 arguments, including the clause, the value and the binding type, is there any way to pass in a criteria?
$Sharings->having("TotalSharing = ?",2, \PDO::PARAM_INT);
Or do I have to add a new virtual column who has as value what I need directly?
Thanks a lot in advance!
Gioia
Ok, was actually a lot easier then I thought, I just used:
$Sharings->having("TotalSharing > ?",0, \PDO::PARAM_INT);
So I didn't need to use a Criteria object, silly of me not to think about this, just so used to use filterBy...
Related
i make one table for with some column with nullable.
i already tried with two different query. one using
Register_member::where('passport',$passport)->orWhere('adharcardnumber',$adharcardnumber)->get();
and second DB::table type query.
$row = Register_member::where('passport',$passport)->orWhere('adharcardnumber',$adharcardnumber)->get();
if (!empty($row))
{
return response()->json(["status"=>0, "message"=>"Adharcard or Paasport number already exit."]);
}
if (empty($row))
{
Register_member::insert(['first_name'=>request('first_name'), 'middle_name'=>request('middle_name'), 'last_name'=>request('last_name'), 'adharcardnumber'=>request('adharcardnumber'), 'ocipcinumber'=>request('ocipcinumber'), 'passport'=>request('passport'), 'birthday'=>request('birthday'),
'mobilecode'=>request('mobilecode'), 'mobilenumber'=>request('mobilenumber'), 'email'=>request('email'), 'address'=>request('address'), 'landmark'=>request('landmark'), 'area'=>request('area'),
'gender'=>request('gender'), 'pincode'=>request('pincode'), 'city_name'=>request('city_name'), 'state_id'=>request('state_id'), 'country_id'=>request('country_id'), 'sampraday'=>request('sampraday'), 'other'=>request('other'), 'sms'=>request('sms')]);
return response()->json(["status"=>1, "message"=>"Member register successful."]);
}
if adharcardnumber or passport number are exists in table, then nagetive response. if in both any one in unique then, insert data in table
Let me suggest you something which I think serve you as a good solution. You can use the unique with required and regex. In this way it will use the already recommended ways of Laravel which are the best.
As an example for your adhaar card,
the validation should look like this
$request->validate([
'adhaar ' =>['required','unique:users','regex:/\d{12}/'],
]);
where adhar is the filed name where adhaar number is entered. Be sure to use validator like this use Illuminate\Support\Facades\Validator;. Also $request is the instance of the Request.
Using the required prevent empty field submission and the regex will throw an error if the pattern is not matched completely. so I think it would be a better a way to handle the scenario.
the above solution will work in both adhaar and passport. But for the passport the regex will be different though.
Please note these are all demo examples, you might need to modify it according to your needs. I use https://www.phpliveregex.com/ for regex making and checking and it is good enough.
I hope you get an idea of how to begin but if you need more information then let me know in the comments.
I'm currently building a Laravel 5.7 app where I have multiple boolean columns that indicate if some facilities are available for a building (model), eg, toilet yes/no. This works fine, but I was wondering what happens when I add more of these boolean columns later when I deploy the app.
Say I add a boolean column 'lights,' I could give it a default value of 0, but not NULL. So now all my existing buildings will say that there are no 'lights' (because the value is 0), where in reality it should be something like 'don't know' or 'undefined' Like a third state.
Should I use ENUM columns with yes/no/undefined instead? What are best practices for this scenario?
What I would do, is create separate table, with object_id, and facility_id. Now, you can have dynamic facilites table, and connect them with object. Connection will only have what it needs, so not every object "light" or something else.
You can certainly create them them as nullable()! It is a common practice, IMO.
As far as best practices go, it depends on how your application should be used. Do you want a user to notice that the state has not been selected one way or the other yet? Maybe you are displaying a prompt to configure the ones that are null. On the other hand, it may be safer to assume that the options should default to false in order to be rendered properly. If this is the case, maybe a notification can go out to your users to update this property.
This worked to me
$table->boolean('lights')->nullable();
Yes Yo are Right this could be a problem some times
But the Boolean CAN BE USED SUCH AS TRUE (OR) FALSE ie) 0 (OR) 1
where in reality it should be something like 'don't know' or 'undefined' Like a third state.
So in this Situation use Can use Enum
For Example Your table will have ups_availablity
Scenario One :
If you want to add NotAvailable by default just pass the value inside default method
$table->enum('ups_availablity', ['Available', 'NotAvailable'])->default('NotAvailable');
Scenario Two:
If you want to add Null add nullable method
$table->enum('ups_availablity', ['Available', 'NotAvailable'])->nullable();
If You have any clarification Kindly Comment Below
Hope its helps
I am trying to do string replace on entries of a column inside a db table. So far, I have reached till here:
$misa = DB::table('mis')->pluck('name');
for($i=0;;$i++)
{
$misa[$i] = substr_replace("$misa[$i]","",-3);
}
The error I am getting is "Undefined offset:443".
P.S. I am not a full-fledged programmer. Only trying to develop a few simple programs for my business. Thank You.
Since it's a collection, use the transform() collection method transform it and avoid this kind of errors. Also, you can just use str_before() method to transform each string:
$misa = DB::table('mis')->pluck('name');
$misa->transform(function($i) {
return str_before($i, ':ut');
});
There are a few ways to make this query prettier and FASTER! The beauty of Laravel is that we have the use of both Eloquent for pretty queries and then Collections to manage the data in a user friendly way. So, first lets clean up the query. You can instead use a DB::Raw select and do all of the string replacing in the query itself like so:
$misa = DB::table('mis')->select(DB::raw("REPLACE(name, ':ut' , '') as name"));
Now, we have a collection containing only the name column, and you've removed ':ut' in your specific case and simply replaced it with an empty string all within the MySQL query itself.
Surprise! That's it. No further php manipulation is required making this process much faster (will be noticeable in large data sets - trust me).
Cheers!
I have domain object named Roll and on the list page i want to show the user all the Roll objects iterating through a list, sorted by entry date.
Here is the code i am using
[rollList: Roll.findAll(sort:"rollDate"){userid==uid}]
rollDate is a field inside the Roll object with data type java.util.Date
Any suggestion on why the output is not sorted by rollDate. When i iterate through the rollList on the gsp page it is not sorted.
Also, on the Roll domain object i have even put this code, but it's still not sorting.
static mapping = {
sort "rollDate"
}
Thank you.
Why aren't you using the dynamic finders?
Roll.findAllByUserid( uid, [ sort:"rollDate", order: 'desc'] )
should work.
The findAll( Map, Closure ) method appeared not a long time ago, perhaps it was not tested well...
You might need to use order in your query as well, then add order to it
[rollList: Roll.findAll(sort:"rollDate", order: 'desc'){userid==uid}]
After trying both the solutions mentioned it still didn't work. So i thought something might be wrong on the front end.
While researching more i found that since i was using jquery data tables it used to re order the sorting. The solutions i found was here
jQuery DataTable rows order
So both the answers above are correct. The issue was actually with jquery data tables.
I'm using Microsoft's CRM software (4.0) and I'm trying to build a query expression. It works fine with querying only String values, but now I need to include a field that is of type CRMBoolean. I should also mention I'm querying custom entities.
So previously, in my query I would only search by a few fields, but they were all of type String. Now I need to add another ConditionExpression for a CRMBoolean. The type of custom entity I'm searching for has a field called "Condition" - which will either have a value of "true" or "false". In CRM the attribute is defined as a bit, but I didn't think that would make a difference.
Here is my code I'm trying to use to find records that have a condition of "true":
oCondition = New ConditionExpression()
oCondition.AttributeName = "myEntity_condition"
oCondition.Operator = ConditionOperator.Like
Dim bool As New CrmBoolean
bool.Value = True
oCondition.Values = New Object() {bool}
listConditions.Add(oCondition)
I don't get an error, but nothing really happens. The number of records that is returned never changes one way or another. Has anyone done this before?
Thanks in advance!
Instead of putting a CrmBoolean object in the oCondition.Values array, just put a regular true/false boolean. I would also concur with benjynito on changing it to ConditionOperator.Equals instead of Like.
I don't know how the like operator is suppose to behave on a boolean. I wonder if its being ignored. Try ConditionOperator.Equal.