I'm using API Platform 3 and Gedmo's Softdeleteable Extension. For my entities, I'm using Extensions to add $queryBuilder->andWhere('o.deletedAt IS NULL') to all queries.
This is working fine, but when using OneToMany relations, API Platform doesn't use these extensions and therefor shows 'softdeleted' entities.
Let's take a slightly modified example from their documentation:
#[ApiResource]
class User
{
#[ORM\OneToMany]
#[Serializer\Groups(['user'])]
public Collection $offers;
}
/api/offers/1 correctly shows a 404, because it has been softdeleted. But /api/users/1 shows something like this:
{
username: 'foo',
offers:
{
'#id': "/api/offers/1",
deletedAt: "2022-01-27T12:04:45+01:00"
}
}
How can I change the query that API Platform uses to fetch the relationships?
You have two methods of achieving this.
Filter hydrated objects:
Inside the existing (or completely new) getter:
return $this->offers->filter(function(Offer offer){
return $offer->getDeletedAt() !== NULL;
});
Apply criteria to query:
Again, inside the existing (or completely new) getter:
$criteria = Criteria::create()
->andWhere(Criteria::expr()->eq('deletedAt', NULL));
return $this->offers->matching($criteria);
The Criteria method is preferable if your user could have LOTS of deleted offers - the filtering would be performed on a database level.
Hope this helps.
Btw, both of these methods are well explained in SymfonyCasts tutorials:
https://symfonycasts.com/screencast/api-platform-security/filtered-collection
https://symfonycasts.com/screencast/symfony4-doctrine-relations/collection-criteria
Related
I've been struggling with this for a while but can't find a clean way to do it, so I'm seeking for some help.
I have custom filters (ApiPlatform 2.5 and Symfony 5.1) on database API outputs, and I need to filter on the current workflow place, or status as you like, of each output.
The Status has the below structure, which is a symfony workflow's place :
Status = { "OPEN": 1 }
My issue is that the status is stored as an array in the DB, and I can't find a way to have the querybuilder finding a match.
I've tried to build locally an array to do an = , a LIKE or an IN :
$status['OPEN'] = 1;
$queryBuilder->andWhere(sprintf('%s.Status = :st', $rootAlias))
->leftJoin(sprintf('%s.Objs', $rootAlias), 'o')
->andWhere('o.Profile = :p')
->setParameters(array(
'st' => $status,
'p' => $profile
));
But no way :(
I implemented a workaround that works but I don't like it as I'm using workflows a lot and need a clean way to filter outputs.
My workaround is fairly simple, when the status is writen as an array in the DB, I also store it as a string in another field called StatusText, then filtering on StatusText is easy and straight.
Status can have different contents obviously : OPEN, CLOSING, CLOSED, ...
Help appreciated !!
Thanks
EDIT & Solution
As proposed by Youssef, use scienta/doctrine-json-functions and use JSON_EXTRACT :
composer require scienta/doctrine-json-functions
Important, that was part of my issue, use the Doctrine type json_array an not array to store the status or the state, however you call it, in the Database.
Integrate the alias provided inside the ApiPlatform custom filter :
$rootAlias = $queryBuilder->getRootAliases()[0];
$json_extract_string = "JSON_EXTRACT(".$rootAlias.".Status, '$.OPEN') = 1";
$queryBuilder->andwhere($json_extract_string )
->leftJoin(sprintf('%s.Objs', $rootAlias), 'o')
->andWhere('o.Profile = :p')
->setParameter('p', $profile);
You need to ask Doctrine if the JSON array contains the status, but you can't do that with the QueryBuilder method.
When you hit the ORM limitations you can use a Native Query with ResultSetMapping. It allows you to write a pure SQL query using specific features of your DBMS but still get entity objects.
Or you can use scienta/doctrine-json-functions and use JSON_EXTRACT
Hi I need to compare two objects in doctrine. I have customer repository and entity. This is my code,
public function index(CarAdRepository $carAdRepository, CustomerRepository $customerRepository): Response {
$cus = $customerRepository->findAll();
$customer = new Customer();
$customer->setTitle('Mr');
$customer->setName('aaa');
$customer->setLastName('bbb');
if($customer == $cus[0]){
echo 'ddd';
}else{
echo 'no';
}
}
in my table I have this values,
But I always get no. It would be great if someone can help
Doctrine implements IdentityMap pattern that ensures that you're always receiving same object for same database row, but only if it was loaded from identity map.
In your case you're comparing some arbitrary object with entity fetched from database using PHP comparison operator. In other words you're checking if 2 objects are equal, but there is no such built-in functionality in PHP.
You have to implement objects comparison function by yourself to achieve your goal because actual comparison logic may vary.
UPDATE:
Simplest example of comparison in your case is property-by-property comparison:
private function compare(Customer $a, Customer $b)
{
return $a->getTitle() === $b->getTitle() &&
$a->getName() === $b->getName() &&
$a->getLastName() === $b->getLastName();
}
It also may be worth to move this method directly into Customer entity with name like isEqual().
It is also possible to implement more generic approach by using reflection, but it may bring certain level of complexity in a case if some non-trivial comparison will need to be involved.
I follow this instruction to create a #userAware annotation which automatically limits all queries on specific entities to the current user.
For example $todoRepo->findByTag("someTag") will automatically add WHERE user_id = 123 to the resulting query to make sure that only ToDo entities of the current user (id 123) can be accessed.
This works great but has one big downside: If for example the admin whats to know how many ToDo entities use the tag someTag he will only find his own entities...
Since using an #userAware annotation seems to be quite common, I wonder if there is any best practice on how to disable/bypass/override this filter/annotation on a specific query.
You can disable the filter. In your example, you must change the kernel request event, like that ...
public function onKernelRequest()
{
if ($user = $this->getUser()) {
if ($user->isAdmin() /* or whatever */) {
$this->em->getFilters()->disable('user_filter');
} else {
$filter = $this->em->getFilters()->enable('user_filter');
$filter->setParameter('id', $user->getId());
$filter->setAnnotationReader($this->reader);
}
}
}
Suppose I write:
new Meteor.Collection("foos");
new Meteor.Collection("bars");
Is there an API for accessing those collections by name? Something like Meteor.Collection.get(name), where name is "foos" or "bars"? I know I could write something like
var MyCollections = {
foos: new Meteor.Collection("foos");
bars: new Meteor.Collection("bars");
}
and then use MyCollections[name], but I'd prefer to use an existing API if one exists.
Based on Shane Donelley's mongoinspector
https://github.com/shanedonnelly1/mongoinspector
getCollection = function (string) {
for (var globalObject in window) {
if (window[globalObject] instanceof Meteor.Collection) {
if (globalObject === string) {
return (window[globalObject]);
break;
};
}
}
return undefined; // if none of the collections match
};
I've just found that package : https://github.com/dburles/mongo-collection-instances/
It allow you to
Foo1 = new Mongo.Collection('foo'); // local
Foo2 = new Mongo.Collection('foo', { connection: connection });
Mongo.Collection.get('foo') // returns instance of Foo1
Mongo.Collection.get('foo', { connection: connection });
// returns instance of Foo2
Hope it will help
This feature was added to Meteor in Feb 2016: "Provide a way to access collections from stores on the client"
It works like this:
Meteor.connection._stores['tasks']._getCollection();
And I was using it as follows to test inserts using the javascript console:
Meteor.connection._stores['tasks']._getCollection().insert({text:'test'});
For the insert it required the insecure package to still be installed otherwise got an access denied message.
As far as I can see in the collection.js source there currently is no way in the api to get an existing Collection by name, once it has already been initialized on the server. It probably wouldn't be hard to add that feature.
So, why not fork Meteor and submit a patch or create a smart package and share it I'm sure there are others out there who'd like the same feature.
With https://github.com/dburles/mongo-collection-instances you can use Mongo.Collection.get('collectionname')
Note that the parameter you're inserting is the same one you use when creating the collection. So if you're using const Products = new Mongo.Collection('products') then you should use get('products') (lowercase).
Note that they have a return value, so you can just do
var Patterns = new Meteor.Collection("patterns");
and use Patterns everywhere.
And when you need to subscribe to server updates, provide "patterns" to Meteor.subscribe().
If you have the same code for multiple collections, the chance is high that you're doing something wrong from a software engineering viewpoint; why not use a single collection with a type field (or something else that differentiates the documents) and use that instead of using multiple collections?
Rather than looking, I've just been doing:
Foos = new Meteor.Collection("foos");
or possibly put it inside another object. I haven't really been making a Collections collection object.
It seems there is no way to get at the wrapped Meteor.Collection object without saving it at creation time, as others have mentioned.
But there is at least a way to list all created collections, and actually access the corresponding Mongo LocalCollection object. They are available from any Meteor Collection object, so to keep it generalistic you can create a dummy collection just for this. Use a method as such (CoffeeScript):
dummy = new Meteor.Collection 'dummy'
getCollection = (name) ->
dummy._driver.collections[name]
These objects do have all the find, findOne, update et al methods, and even some that Meteor doesn't seem to expose, like pauseObservers and resumeObservers which seem interesting. But I haven't tried fiddling with this mongo LocalCollection reference directly to knowif it will update the server collection accordingly.
var bars = new Meteor.Collection("foos");
Judging by what the collection.js does, the line we use to instantiate the collection object opens a connection to the database and looks for the collection matching the name we give. So in this case a connection is made and the collection 'foos' is bound to the Meteor.Collection object 'bars'. See collection.js AND remote_collection_driver.js within the mongo-livedata package.
As is the way with MongoDB, whilst you can, you don't have to explicitly create collections. As stated in the MongoDB documentation:
A collection is created when the first document is inserted.
So, I think what you're after is what you already have - unless I've totally misunderstood what you're intentions are.
You can always roll your own automatic collection getter.
Say you have a couple of collections called "Businesses" and "Clients". Put a reference each into some "collections" object and register a Handlebars helper to access those "collections" by collections["name"].
i.e. put something like this on the client-side main.js:
collections = collections || {};
collections.Businesses = Businesses;
collections.Clients = Clients;
Handlebars.registerHelper("getCollection", function(coll) {
return collections[coll].find();
});
Then in your HTML, just refer to the collection by name:
{{#each getCollection 'Businesses'}}
<div> Business: {{_id}} </div>
{{/each}}
{{#each getCollection 'Clients'}}
<div> Client: {{_id}} </div>
{{/each}}
Look ma, no more generic "list all records" boilerplate js required!
In RavenDB I can store objects of type Products and Categories and they will automatically be located in different collections. This is fine.
But what if I have 2 logically completely different types of products but they use the same class? Or instead of 2 I could have a generic number of different types of products. Would it then be possible to tell Raven to split the product documents up in collections, lets say based on a string property available on the Product class?
Thankyou in advance.
EDIT:
I Have created and registered the following StoreListener that changes the collection for the documents to be stored on runtime. This results in the documents correctly being stored in different collections and thus making a nice, logically grouping of the documents.
public class DynamicCollectionDefinerStoreListener : IDocumentStoreListener
{
public bool BeforeStore(string key, object entityInstance, RavenJObject metadata)
{
var entity = entityInstance as EntityData;
if(entity == null)
throw new Exception("Cannot handle object of type " + EntityInstance.GetType());
metadata["Raven-Entity-Name"] = RavenJToken.FromObject(entity.TypeId);
return true;
}
public void AfterStore(string key, object entityInstance, RavenJObject metadata)
{
}
}
However, it seems I have to adjust my queries too in order to be able to get the objects back. My typical query of mine used to look like this:
session => session.Query<EntityData>().Where(e => e.TypeId == typeId)
With the 'typeId' being the name of the new raven collections (and the name of the entity type saved as a seperate field on the EntityData-object too).
How would I go about quering back my objects? I can't find the spot where I can define my collection at runtime prioring to executing my query.
Do I have to execute some raw lucene queries? Or can I maybe implement a query listener?
EDIT:
I found a way of storing, querying and deleting objects using dynamically defined collections, but I'm not sure this is the right way to do it:
Document store listener:
(I use the class defined above)
Method resolving index names:
private string GetIndexName(string typeId)
{
return "dynamic/" + typeId;
}
Store/Query/Delete:
// Storing
session.Store(entity);
// Query
var someResults = session.Query<EntityData>(GetIndexName(entity.TypeId)).Where(e => e.EntityId == entity.EntityId)
var someMoreResults = session.Advanced.LuceneQuery<EntityData>(GetIndexName(entityTypeId)).Where("TypeId:Colors AND Range.Basic.ColorCode:Yellow)
// Deleting
var loadedEntity = session.Query<EntityData>(GetIndexName(entity.TypeId)).Where(e =>
e.EntityId == entity.EntityId).SingleOrDefault();
if (loadedEntity != null)
{
session.Delete<EntityData>(loadedEntity);
}
I have the feeling its getting a little dirty, but is this the way to store/query/delete when specifying the collection names runtime? Or do I trap myself this way?
Stephan,
You can provide the logic for deciding on the collection name using:
store.Conventions.FindTypeTagName
This is handled statically, using the generic type.
If you want to make that decision at runtime, you can provide it using a DocumentStoreListner