I'm trying to find if there's a nice way using SelectTokens and JsonPath to find all controls with type="check" and no "options". So an example JSON could be:
Value = #"{
""subsections"": [
{
""name"": ""Subsection Name"",
""caption"": ""Subsection Caption""
},
],
""controls"": [
{ ""type"" : ""check"",
""name"" : ""Checkbox2"",
""caption"" : ""Checkbox Caption 2"",
""options"" : [
{ ""caption"" : ""Yes"" },
{ ""caption"" : ""No"" }
]
},
{ ""type"" : ""check"",
""name"" : ""Checkbox2"",
""caption"" : ""Checkbox Caption 2"",
}
]
}"
I'm trying things like: $..controls[?(#.type=='check' && !(#.options))] but I can't see any option to test for a not exists.
The only option that I can think of is getting all check types and then using Linq to filter those without options. Just wondering if there is a way to do it solely through JsonPath?
Kind regards
Sidharth
Related
I'm creating a blog using Next.js + MDX-Bundler and trying to use remark-disable-tokenizers to disable "indented codeblock". But i'm not able to make it work. I found a reference here which says that we can use remark-disable-tokenizers for this purpose.
Here is my xdmoptions for reference:
import disableTokens from 'remark-disable-tokenizers';
xdmOptions(options) {
options.rehypePlugins = [
...(options.rehypePlugins ?? []),
rehypeSlug,
rehypeCodeTitles,
rehypePrism,
[disableTokens,
{
block: [
['indentedCode', 'indented code is not supported by MDX-Bundler']
]
}],
[
rehypeAutolinkHeadings,
{...}
]
];
return options;
},
I am trying to find the latest (or earliest, depending on comparison operator) version of an RPM package (the RPM bit is important). I am using AQL query similar to this one:
items.find(
{ "$and" : [
{ "#rpm.metadata.name": { "$eq": "awesome_package"}},
{ "#rpm.metadata.version": { "$gte": "19.300.0.58"}} ]
})
.include("#rpm.metadata.version")
.sort( { "$asc": [ "name" ]})
As already answered by Artifactory KnowledgeBase, it's impossible to sort on properties, so instead of just sorting on #rpm.metadata.version and taking the first top result by using .limit(1) I must use property condition in the find clause.
It appears though that Artifactory's built-in comparison is purely lexicographic, so for the query above I get the following result:
{
"results" : [ {
"repo" : "yum-private-local",
"path" : "some/path",
"name" : "awesome_package-19.300.0.9-1.noarch.rpm",
"properties" : [ {
"key" : "rpm.metadata.version",
"value" : "19.300.0.9"
} ]
},{
"repo" : "yum-private-local",
"path" : "some/path",
"name" : "awesome_package-19.300.0.58-0.noarch.rpm",
"properties" : [ {
"key" : "rpm.metadata.version",
"value" : "19.300.0.58"
} ]
},{
"repo" : "yum-private-local",
"path" : "some/path",
"name" : "awesome_package-19.300.0.59-0.noarch.rpm",
"properties" : [ {
"key" : "rpm.metadata.version",
"value" : "19.300.0.59"
} ]
} ],
"range" : {
"start_pos" : 0,
"end_pos" : 3,
"total" : 3
}
}
This result includes version 19.300.0.9, which, according to RPM spec, is older than what I am searching for (>= 19.300.0.58) and shouldn't be included in the results, but Artifactory finds it nonetheless, most likely due to its search comparisons being lexicographic.
Also note the ordering of the results, which does appear to use numerical sorting (version "19.300.0.9" comes before "19.300.0.58" and "19.300.0.59").
Question: is it possible to force Artifactory to use numerical (SemVer) comparison in search criteria? If not, is there any other way I can exclude irrelevant versions from the result list?
Although not in lines with what is asked but instead of name sorting if done by the created field would also be helpful.
created:
Here is my structure of realtime database in firebase
{
"student1" : {
"name" : "somename",
"skillset" : [
"cpp",
"c",
"java"
],
other properties
},
"student2" : {
"name" : "somename",
"skillset" : [
"javascript",
"c",
"python"
],
other properties
},
"student3" : {
"name" : "somename",
"skillset" : [
"cpp",
"java"
],
other properties
},
"student4" : {
"name" : "somename",
"skillset" : [
"java",
"kotlin"
],
other properties
} }
I want to retrieve all the students having some specific set of all skills
e.g. skills = ["cpp","java"]
then answer should be ["student1","student3"]
Your current structure allows you to easily determine the skills for a user. It does however not make it easy to determine the users for a skill. To allow that, you'll need to add a reverse index, looking something like:
skills: {
java: {
student1: true,
student3: true,
student4: true
},
kotlin: {
student4: true
}
...
}
With the above you can look up the user IDs for a skill, and from there look up each user. For more on this, see my answer here: Firebase query if child of child contains a value
But this still won't allow you to query for users by multiple skills. To allow that, you'll have to add skill combinations to the new data structure. For example with the above skills, there is one user who knows both kotlin and Java:
skills: {
java: {
student1: true,
student3: true,
student4: true
},
java_kotlin: {
student4: true
}
kotlin: {
student4: true
}
...
}
While this leads to extra data, it performs quite well in practice, since you can always directly access the data that you need (so there's no real database query needed).
That is not possible under this structure, as firebase only support filtering by one child.
In your case, you would need to get all the data and filter by code
I'm working on a React Native application with AppSync, and following is my schema to the problem:
type JoineeDeletedConnection {
items: [Joinee]
nextToken: String
}
type Mutation {
deleteJoinee(ids: [ID!]): [Joinee]
}
In 'request mapping template' to resolver to deleteJoinee, I have following (following the tutorial from https://docs.aws.amazon.com/appsync/latest/devguide/tutorial-dynamodb-batch.html):
#set($ids = [])
#foreach($id in ${ctx.args.ids})
#set($map = {})
$util.qr($map.put("id", $util.dynamodb.toString($id)))
$util.qr($ids.add($map))
#end
{
"version" : "2018-05-29",
"operation" : "BatchDeleteItem",
"tables" : {
"JoineesTable": $util.toJson($ids)
}
}
..and in 'response mapping template' to the resolver,
$util.toJson($ctx.result.data.JoineesTable)
The problem is, when I ran the query, I got empty result and nothing deleted to database as well:
// calling the query
mutation DeleteJoinee {
deleteJoinee(ids: ["xxxx", "xxxx"])
{
id
}
}
// returns
{
"data": {
"deleteJoinee": [
null
]
}
}
I finally able to solve this puzzle, thanks to the answer mentioned here to point me to some direction.
Although, I noticed that JoineesTable does have trusted entity/role to the IAM 'Roles' section, yet it wasn't working for some reason. Looking into this more, I noticed that the existing policy had following actions as default:
"Action": [
"dynamodb:DeleteItem",
"dynamodb:GetItem",
"dynamodb:PutItem",
"dynamodb:Query",
"dynamodb:Scan",
"dynamodb:UpdateItem"
]
Once I added following two more actions to the list, things have started working:
"dynamodb:BatchWriteItem",
"dynamodb:BatchGetItem"
Thanks to #Vasileios Lekakis and #Ionut Trestian on this appSync quest )
I'm trying to bind a Commerce product type to my own custom type node (serving as a display node). The goal is to enter new data in as few places as possible. I'm therefore exploring a rule-based creation of one type upon creation of the other. Seems like both directions are working. Of the two though, I prefer automatic creation of a Commerce Product upon user creation of Custom Type node, which will then serve as a product display.
I was wondering if anyone has been through this choice and could recommend this. Also, is the commerce_product_display_manager module necessary?
Commerce Product Display Manager is not necessary, I've gotten this to work and I've never used that module.
I went for the route of automatically creating a Node after saving the Product.
Below is my Rules export for this:
{ "rules_create_product_display" : {
"LABEL" : "Create Product Display",
"PLUGIN" : "reaction rule",
"REQUIRES" : [ "rules", "entity" ],
"ON" : [ "commerce_product_insert" ],
"IF" : [
{ "data_is" : { "data" : [ "commerce-product:type" ], "value" : "**PRODUCT_TYPE**" } }
],
"DO" : [
{ "entity_create" : {
"USING" : {
"type" : "node",
"param_type" : "**NODE_TYPE**",
"param_title" : "[commerce-product:title]",
"param_author" : [ "commerce-product:creator" ]
},
"PROVIDE" : { "entity_created" : { "entity_created" : "Created entity" } }
}
},
{ "data_set" : {
"data" : [ "entity-created:**PRODUCT_REFERENCE**" ],
"value" : [ "commerce-product" ]
}
}
]
}
}
You'll need to substitute your own values for:
PRODUCT_TYPE (product type that has been created)
NODE_TYPE (node type being created)
PRODUCT_REFERENCE (field that will reference the created product)
Sorry I can't dedicate more time to a better answer now, let me know if you'd like me to elaborate on the process of creating the above using the GUI
The above example was useful but here is a more specific one:
{ "rules_create_product_display_on_product_creation" : {
"LABEL" : "Create Product Display on Product creation",
"PLUGIN" : "reaction rule",
"REQUIRES" : [ "rules", "entity" ],
"ON" : [ "commerce_product_insert" ],
"IF" : [
{ "entity_is_of_type" : { "entity" : [ "commerce-product" ], "type" : "commerce_product" } }
],
"DO" : [
{ "entity_create" : {
"USING" : {
"type" : "node",
"param_type" : "product_display",
"param_title" : "[commerce-product:title]",
"param_author" : [ "commerce-product:creator" ]
},
"PROVIDE" : { "entity_created" : { "entity_created" : "Created entity" } }
}
},
{ "data_set" : {
"data" : [ "entity-created:field-product:0" ],
"value" : [ "commerce-product" ]
}
}
]
}
}
The only problem I had was with the second action ("data_set")- it was important to select "entity-created:field-product:0", not the "entity-created:field-product" to make it work because we want to assign specific product and not a list of products.
This example is using the standard product display node type (product_display) but you can change it with the one you are using. Also have in mind that this is working only for one product type - for every product type a separated rule should be created. You may create also a rule for deleting the product display node when deleting the product.
This rule is useful only when you have connection one product-one product display. If you need to add more products per product display (colors, images with different prices) then you have to use Commerce Bulk Product Creation module.