I have a Booking entity which has a ManyToOne relationship with my Car entity. I use axios to post my data for creating a Booking. I'm not sure if it's better practice to pass my whole Car object to my create function inside my Controller or to only pass the Car's id to the route of the function (which then fetches the Car from my database thanks to Symfonys param converter). Or is there another way which is considered "best practice"?
It depends on your scenario and the way you want to use.
Whenever you have to create an object / row inside the database then you will have to pass the whole object. assuming that the cars has already been created inside the database and you only have to link the booking object with the car than i will prefer you to bind it using ids rather than placing the whole object.
If you place the whole car object than it will increase the retrieval performance but if someday the information of car is changed than you will have to change the information on every booking object in which you placed the car object but if you just bind it with the Car Id than it will always give user the latest information even if the info of Car has been changed.
I thought that it will reduce the performance of the application if we used Id but that is not the case the DBMS use indexing to manage the search and search through id takes not time. It performance is not an issue and yes if you pass a whole object than it will also consume more data (since a large amount of data will be uploaded).
Related
I need to extract all the synonym values for a particular entity. For example, I have an entity named Vehicle with values Car and Bus. For Car I have three synonyms, Mercedes,Volvo and Audi. Now what I need is when the entity Vehicle is detected in the user input for a value Car, I want to extract all the three synonym values present for Car. I know #Vehicle.literal will return the exact synonym value detected in the user input. But how can I retrieve all the synonyms for a particular entity value?
You can use the Conversation API to get information on an entity and its metadata. That information is not available in a dialog context itself.
IMHO a better way would be to use a database or similar to match up the detected entity with a list of synonyms. Usually, Conversation service is not used on its own, but part of a solution. The app server could perform the lookup if flagged. Take a look at the dialog actions for that. Or this suggestion on using the method of replaced markers in an answer.
Basically you can not extract the synonyms.One thing yiu can do is to create another entity with values as your car names and synonyms as vehicle.So that whenever a vehicle is input it will give you all the entity values.
I created a custom object and i want to get all its existing records. Is there a way of doing that via the REST API? Seems like a very basic and simple operation but i couldn't find information about it anywhere.
As you say, it seems like a basic task, but in the reality, it is more complex indeed.
Unfortunately, the Get Custom Object endpoint (which is the only endpoint to fetch Custom Objects) requires the filterType and filterValues parameters to be present as well. Basically this means that you have to have some information about the queried objects beforehand.
Also, a further restriction is that the value of filterType can only be one of the “searchable” fields of the Custom Object, meaning that it has to be either a Link field or a Dedupe field. (These fields are listed under the searchableFields property in the response from the Describe Custom Objects endpoint.)
So as mentioned above, you have to know the values for at least one of the properties of your Custom Objects before you make the query.
With additional queries though, you can grab these required values.
Let's say, you have your Custom Object linked to the Lead Object, and the Link field is called Owner Email (with the REST API name being ownerEmail) which links to the Email Address field of the Lead Object. In this case you could set the filterType to ownerEmail and set the emails of the leads as filterValues.
Then it is up to you how you gather the emails of those Leads who has a Custom Object attached. Luckily the REST API won’t throw an error if you provide a value that has no corresponding Custom Objects.
If your Custom Object is linked to a Lead, it's a bit complex but you can do like this:
Create a smart list and filter with "Has You Custom Object"
Get the smart list with API (GET /rest/asset/v1/smartLists.json)
Based on this list of Leads, get all Custom Objects (see the other answer).
I created custom table in corda using QueryableState. e.g. IOUStates table.
I can able to see the custom information getting stored in this kind of table.
but i observed that if party A and Party B is doing the transaction then this
custom information gets stored at both the places , e.g. IOUStates
table getting created at nodeA ledger as well as nodeB's ledger.
and custom information is stored in partyA's and PartyB's ledger.
My Question is :-
If some Transaction is getting processed from PartyA's node , then
I want to store part of the transaction's data i.e. custom data ONLY at partyA's Ledger.* level . i.e. off-Ledger of partA only.
It should not be shared with partyB.
In simple case , how to store Only node specific off ledger custom data ?
Awaiting for some reply...
Thanks.
There's a number of ways to achieve this:
Don't use Corda at all! If the data is truly off-ledger then why are you using Corda? Instead, store it in a separate database. Of course you can "JOIN" it with on-ledger data if required, as the on-ledger data is stored in a SQL database.
Similar to point one except you can use the jdbcSession() functionality of the ServiceHub to create a custom table in the node's database. This table can easily be accessed from within your flows.
Create a ContractState object that only has one participant: the node that wants to store the data. I call this a "unilateral" state, i.e. a state that only one party ever stores.
Most importantly, if you don't want to share some data with a counter-party then it should never be disclosed inside a corda state object or attachment that another party might see. Instead:
inside your flows, you can use the data encapsulated within the shared state object (e.g. the IOU) to derive the private data
alternatively if the data is supplied when the flow begins then store the private data locally using one of the methods above
I am working on an enterprise scale project where I have a self referencing table called categories as below. Also in my current model I am using following table associations to fetch data. ( using EF6).
I have M-M mapping tables in DB for above M-M relationships.
In my controller GET action result returns the model which has Ilist(all parent categories). Then when the user is selecting items (in view) I am using Ajax to retrieve Ilist for next subset of categories (by passing to controller by Id - return Json result) and dynamically show next to the parent select list as below. ( and I have up to 4 subsets)
As the user is selecting categories, I am using Ajax call to load related categories and create selectlist or dropdownlist dynamically as below:
My question is Since all these data is loaded through Ajax, how can I bind them to my parent model. How can I capture user selected data into one parent model when user is posting the from to controller.
I know I can use Ajax and use Json to capture & transfer to contoller , But I need to use modelview , Can I use partiview to overcome this ?
Please advise the available options..
The key is making sure the name values match the object hierarchy accepted by the post operation. This is certainly doable; it's difficult because several AJAX operations build the UI, but one operation processes it, so you have to ensure the data expressions match the object being posted back.
You can use Html.NameFor() as a workaround to ensuring the naming paths work OK. Collections can make this difficult.
I have a table in my SQL Server DB that holds auditing information for certain actions a user takes within my system. Things like who performed the action, when it was performed, and what action are all pieces of information that can easily span multiple actions. But depending on the action performed, there may be other information that I want to capture, that is specific to the action. To handle this, I elected to add an "XML Metadata" column to the table that holds serialized XML of different metadata objects that I've created. I created a metadata object for each of the actions that I'm interested in tracking extra for. So each object is responsible for tracking specific extra information (metadata) for it's action. The objects are serialized and written to my new column.
I have SystemAction objects that I use to store information from this table, and I've added a string field that holds the XML string from the DB. The problem is, when I'm reading this XML back from the SystemAction objects, I'm struggling with a way to generically translate it back into it's correct metadata object. Each metadata object is going to have different fields, and each object has it's own static method that takes an XML string and attempts to return the metadata object type. So I could say:
SomeActionMetadata mdObj = SomeActionMetadata.BuildFromXML(xmlStringFromDB);
But I really don't know of a way to say "Here's some XML that could translate to any number of different objects. Figure it out and give me the right object back."
Given my current implementation, I could always just assign a unique ID to each metadata object that is stored as a field in each object, then use a case statement to switch on that ID and use the appropriate class's static build method to build the right object. But I was hoping for something a little more automatic than that. What if I have a List of SystemAction objects and just want to loop through them and generate the correct metadata object type?
I was hoping someone might have run across something similar to this before, or could point me to an article or post that could help me out. Thanks very much.
As indicated by Subhash Dike in the comments below, there is a similar SO question here that was able to point me in the right direction.