I have some json, for examle:
data = {
"name":"Bob","age":"20",
"name":"Jo","age":"21",
"name":"Jo","age":"22",
"name":"Nick","age":"23"
}
Next, I use crossfilter, create dimension and filter it:
let ndx = crossfilter(data);
let dim = ndx.dimension(d => d.name).filter(d !== "Jo");
//try to get filtered values
let filtered = dim.top(Infinity); // -> return 2 values where 'name'!='Jo'
//"name":"Bob","age":"20"
//"name":"Nick","age":"23"
let myGroup = dim.group(d => {
if(d === 'Jo') {
//Why we come here? This values must be filtered already
}
})
How can I filter my dimension and don't have these values on 'dim.group'?
Not sure what version you are using, but in the current version of Crossfilter, when a new group is created all records are first added to the group and then filtered records are removed. So the group accessor will be run at least once for all records.
Why do we do this? Because for certain types of grouping logic, it is important for the group to "see" a full picture of all records that are in scope.
It is possible that the group accessor is run over all records (even filtered ones) anyway in order to build the group index, but I don't remember.
Related
is there any solution? e.g. I have data in Map with key favorites_ prefix and values _suffix (for example: favorites_jeans, favorites_suit,...,). I want to by dint of loop get that values and set in List, because of it I must give keys of map, right?
I want to know how can I get values of myMap["favorites_*"] (* - after the favorites_ any symbols).
List<String> favoritesStrings = ['favorite_name','favorite_jeans',];
Map<String,dynamic> myMap = {
favoritesStrings[0]:'0',
favoritesStrings[1]:'1',
'someKey':'2',
'anotherKey':'3',
};
favoritesStrings.forEach((favorite)=>print(myMap[favorite]));//prints 0 1
As per what I understood, you want to fetch value from map using "favorites_" + a dynamic value from list as key.
You just have to use String templates and use $ to insert suffix variable to build key dynamically:
List<String> suffixList = ["jeans", "suit", "shirt"];
for(String suffix in suffixList) {
var item = myMap["favorites_$suffix"];
// Do something with item
}
Hope it helps
Is there a way to always have one item per line in the timeline? I don't want two or more items to share the same line, whatever the dates are.
Thanks.
You have to use groups, or if you're already using those for another purpose, you have to use subgroups.
Here's the official documentation for items, groups and subgroups (I'm assuming the website isn't gonna expire anytime soon... again...).
If you can use groups
Specify a different group for every item. You can set the group's content as an empty string, if you don't want to have a label for it on the left side of the Timeline.
If you want to arrange the groups in a specific way, specify an ordering function as the Timeline's options' groupOrder property. Example:
var options = {
// other properties...
groupOrder: function (a, b) {
if(a.content > b.content)// alphabetic order
return 1;
else if(a.content < b.content)
return -1;
return 0;
}
};
If you have to use subgroups
When you create an item, put it in the group it belongs to but also specify for it the subgroup property so that it's unique, like the item's id. For example, you can use the id itself, or add a prefix or suffix to it.
In the Timeline's options, set the stack and stackSubgroups properties to true.
In each group, set the subgroupStack property to true and specify an ordering function as the group's subgroupOrder property. Example:
var group = {
id: 1,
content: 'example group',
subgroupStack: true,
subgroupOrder: function(a, b) {
var tmp = a.start.getTime() - b.start.getTime();
return tmp === 0 ? parseInt(a.id) - parseInt(b.id) : tmp;
// if the start dates are the same, I compare the items' ids.
// this is because due to a bug (I guess) the ordering of items
// that return 0 in the ordering function might "flicker" in certain
// situations. if you want to order the items alphabetically in that
// case, compare their "content" property, or whatever other
// property you want.
}
};
I am doing some queries for Data Visualization and rely on GroupBy, Avg, Sum, and similar functions to get a good dataset from the DB.
I would like to use something similar to GroupBy with ServiceStack OrmLite. On the ShippersExample page I see the following query. Is there an easier or better way to do this?
For example, I have a 'location' column and would like to find the top 5 locations of an entry, and list these locations with the amount of times it occurs. I only have 1 table, so no need for joins.
var rows = db.SqlList<ShipperTypeCount>(
"SELECT {0}, COUNT(*) AS Total
FROM Shippers
GROUP BY {0}
ORDER BY Total".Fmt("ShipperTypeId".SqlColumn()));
You can also use a SqlExpression, e.g:
var rows = db.SqlList<ShipperTypeCount>(
db.From<Shipper>()
.GroupBy(x => x.ShipperTypeId)
.OrderBy("Total")
.Select(x => new { x.ShipperTypeId, Total = Sql.As(Sql.Count("*"), "Total") }));
Alternatively instead of using a concrete POCO you can use a generic dictionary to populate a dictionary of ShipperTypeId => Total, e.g:
var q = db.From<Shipper>()
.GroupBy(x => x.ShipperTypeId)
.OrderBy("2")
.Select(x => new { x.ShipperTypeId, Total = Sql.Count("*") });
var results = db.Dictionary<int, int>(q);
I have 2 List one stores the name of filterable columns(of type DropDown) and another store the values to load in those filterable columns.
List<string> filterableFields = new List<string>() { "A_B", "C_D", "E_F" };
List<string> AB, CD , EF;
Now at the run time I get the data from web service and I have written a function to to extract values for these filterable fields and store the values to 2nd List.
private void prepareListForFilterableColumns(XDocument records)
{
foreach (var currentField in filterableFields)
{
var values = (from xml in records.Descendants(z + "row")
let val = (string)xml.Attribute("ows_" + currentField.Replace("_", "_x0020_"))
where val != ""
orderby val
select val
).Distinct();
switch (currentField)
{
case "A_B": AB = values.ToList(); break;
case "C_D": CD = values.ToList(); break;
}
}
}
Now I was thinking that instead of hard coding the assignment in swtich case block, If I could just use the first List name "A_B" and replace "_" from it to point to my 2nd List and assign values.ToList() to it.
I understand that c# is a static language, So not sure if we can achieve this, but IF I can it will make my function generic.
Thanks a lot in advance for time and help.
Vishal
You could use a dictionary of lists of strings instead of 3 lists to store the values.
Dictionary<string, List<string>> val lists = new Dictionary<string,List<string>>();
And make the keys of the dictionary equal to the filterables: "AB", "CD",..
then, instead of AB you would use valLists["AB"] and could then reference reach list based on a string key.
The other option would be to use reflection but that would be slower and unnecessarily a bit more complicated.
I have a basic search control which lists companies from a CRM depending on predefined search/filtering criteria supplied by dropdowns. The default selection is "ALL" for each DropDown, otherwise the user chooses a specific item(s). I'd like to be able to construct a Linq query dynamically based on the selections. Out of the 5 selectors they supply values that I can match against the Company table, but two of the selectors (if either or both are chosen) would require a join or joins, else no action should be taken again the base result set. I hope this makes sense.
I'm not sure how to do this effectively. Here is my code:
private void Search()
{
EnergyPubsCRMDataContext dc = new EnergyPubsCRMDataContext();
var results = (from c in dc.Companies
select c);
//only create the join if the selected index > 0
if (ddlIndustry.SelectedIndex > 0)
{
//A company can be in 1 or more industries, thus here I want to join
//with the CompanyIndustry table and have a WHERE clause to match on the ddlIndustry.SelectedValue
}
//only create the join if the selected index > 0
if (ddlServices.SelectedIndex > 0)
{
//A company can offer 1 or more services. Here I want to join to the CompanyService table
//on the CompanyID and have a WHERE clause to match the ddlServices.SelectedValue
}
//These work OK to shape the overal query further (they don't need joins)
if (ddlCountry.SelectedIndex > 0)
results = results.Where(c => c.CountryID == Convert.ToInt32(ddlCountry.SelectedValue));
if (ddlStateRegion.SelectedIndex > 0)
results = results.Where(c => c.StateRegionID == Convert.ToInt32(ddlStateRegion.SelectedValue));
if (ddlAccountManagers.SelectedIndex > 0)
{
Guid g = new Guid(ddlAccountManagers.SelectedValue);
results = results.Where(c => c.UserId == g);
}
results = results.OrderBy(c => c.CompanyName);
//Bind to Grid....
}
if (ddlIndustry.SelectedIndex > 0)
{
//A company can be in 1 or more industries, thus here I want to join
//with the CompanyIndustry table and have a WHERE clause to match on the ddlIndustry.SelectedValue
results = results.Where(c => c.CompanyIndustry.IndustryID == ddlIndustry.SelectedValue);
}
Assuming you have correct foreign keys in your database/DBML.
This will generate the join implicitly.
I had very similar issue and no foreign keys I could leverage.
My solution would translate to something like this:
results = results
.Join(dc.CompanyIndustry, c => c.CompanyID, ci => ci.CompanyID, (c, ci) => new { c, ci.IndustryID })
.Where (a => a.IndustryID == ddlIndustry.SelectedValue)
.Select(a => a.c);
Basically:
1) first we create a join, with a projection that gives us IndustryID (join)
2) we filter based on IndustryID (where)
3) we return original anonymous type, so that we can modify original query (select)