Ok,
Basically what I'd LIKE to do, is have a "Searchable" interface I implement on my entities, and have my repositories automatically call Index on save, and handle the update/delete accordingly. This all currently works. Ultimately I'd like to search against all these indicies and be able to give some sort of indicator of the type itself.
When I try to query them all back out... I use code that looks like this:
eclient.Search<Searchable>(s => s.AllIndices().Query(q => q.QueryString(d => d.Query(query))))
I don't get anything back from this unless I explicitly specify the type I'd like to return.
Any pointers would be hugely appreciated. At this point my object model is changeable if interface/baseclass makes a difference etc.
Actually I was able to determine that my problem was actually more of a problem with what I was doing with the results. JavascriptSerializer didnt know how to properly serialize the objects, whereas json.net did a lot better job.
Related
I'm using parse-platform with React-Redux and thunk.
If I make a query for objects which have pointers as attributes, sometimes I get the embedded attributes of the pointer and sometime I don't, is this normal behaviour? It means having to make lots more queries for the pointer attributes as you can't be confident they will be in the original results.
As you state correctly sometimes Parse fetches the pointers of an object and sometimes it doesn't.
In order to ensure that the query will bring the pointers of the object alongside all its attributes its a good idea to use the include method as query.include('pointerAttribute').
In order to ensure that only some attributes will be fetched and the rest won't, then it is a good idea to use the select method query.select('attribute1toselect', 'attribute2toselect').
Using select is much better if not going to use all the attributes as the payload's weight in the response will decrease and the frontend will have to deal with less data.
I'm working on a DSL where this would save me a lot of time trying to implement one myself. To clarify, i want something like
MyObject.where(:name => 'foo').first
that i can use on an object which is simply stored in a non-persistant list or array.
I've been trying to google for something like it, but unfortunately it's quite hard to search for this kind of thing.
Thanks!
Of the two choices I have to access the value of a control which is the most efficient?
getComponent("ControlName").getValue();
or
dataSource.getItemValue("FieldName");
I find that on occasion the getComponent does not seem to return the current value, but accessing the dataSource seems to be more reliable. So does it make much difference from a performance perspective which one is used?
The dataSource.getValue seems to work everywhere that I have tried it. However, when working with rowData I still seem to need to do a rowData.getColumnValue("Something"). rowData.getValue("Something") fails.
Neither. The fastest syntax is dataSource.getValue ("FieldName"). The getItemValue method is only reliable on the document data source, whereas the getValue method is not only also available on view entries accessed via a view data source (although in that context you would pass it the programmatic name of a view column, which is not necessarily the same name as a field), but will also be available on any custom data sources that you develop or install (e.g. third-party extension libraries). Furthermore, it does automatic type conversion that you'd have to do yourself if you used getItemValue instead.
Even on very simple pages, dataSource.getValue ("FieldName") is 5 times as fast as getComponent ("id").getValue (), because, as Fredrik mentions, first it has to find the component, and then ask it what the value is... which, behind the scenes, just asks the data source anyway. So it will always be faster to just ask the data source yourself.
NOTE: the corresponding write method is dataSource.setValue ("FieldName", "NewValue"), not dataSource.replaceItemValue ("FieldName", "NewValue"). Both will work, but setValue also does the same type conversion that getValue does, so you can pass it data that doesn't strictly conform to the old Domino Java API and it usually just figures out what the value needs to be converted to in order to be "safe" for Domino to store.
I would say that the most efficient way is to get the value directly from the datasource.
Because if you use getComponent("ControlName").getValue(); you will do a get on the component first and then a getValue from that. So do a single get from the datasource is more efficient if you ask me.
I'm in a need to use beforeFind() in a child class of CActiveRecord.
Basically, I need to convert some data from before actual search in the DB is performed.
How do I alter the about-to-occur-find-operation that is about to take place, inside beforeFind()? Messing with $this attributes is not useful since its not even populated, which is a little surprise.
I've seen that the documentation mentions a "hidden CDbCriteria parameter" but I just couldn't guess how to use it... . Unfortunately, the documentation on this subject is slim.
What I need to do is rather simple: I've got a table column for storing IP addresses. The most efficient design from scalability perspective, is to use a VARBINARY(16) data type for the column. See for example this SO question page (and answers) on this.
So, the cleanest solution would be to have beforeFind(), afterFind() and beforeSave() work transparently for the users.
In the code stack, the IP addresses would be the normal dotted-quad and in the DB level, its whatever that goes into the field after utilizing PHP's inet_pton() method in those after/before hook methods.
It was supposed to be cool. and it is cool - with afterFind() and beforeSave(), where I have the ip_address attribute of the object at hand, at the mercy of my uber-manipulation powers.
Here's the point, and the need: thing is, I don't know how to achieve that on beforeFind(). I cannot do a blind mergeWith() as I need to check if ip_address attribute is part of the original criteria, and that I don't know how to do.
Help!
TIA :)
I've got this nice suggestion on yii forums.
Basically, I just need to override findByAttributes() in the child class and I'm done :)
In C# on Framework 4, I have a List and List. They can be joined on the JoinId property. ParentObj will have 2 ChildObj matches, sometimes 10.
I would like to take each Parent and all Children and serialize to a single XML entity. I am having a hard time figuring out where to start, because I also need to serialize the objects in a custom way. Can I use Linq-to-XML in this case to get each object written correctly? XmlSerializer? Not sure.
Thanks.
Can I use Linq-to-XML in this case to get each object written correctly?
Yes. This is exactly what you need. A basic example.
XmlSerializer?
This will work too, but this approach is older and I think it is less appropriate and more complicated in this case.