I'm new to Meteor and I don't quite get the whether my variables will be available to the client or server or both.
var variable_1 = [];
if (Meteor.isClient) {
var variable_2 = [];
}
if (Meteor.isServer) {
var variable_3 = [];
}
In this example if I use Meteor.method in the server side on variable_1, will I be able to access whatever I just did to variable_1 from client? Can I access variable_2 with a method in Meter.isServer? What is the difference between the scope of variable_1 and variable_2?
I'm guessing that variable_1 is accessible to both client and server, variable_2 is just client, and variable_3 is just server. However, I'm quite unsure about guess on the scope of variable_1. Does anyone know?
This is really a JavaScript question. All variables will be available everywhere. That's because JavaScript doesn't have block scoping. It has some kind of function-scoping. Read the answer here for more info.
Related
I have a survey in a google form which gets stored in a google sheet. From the google sheet data get synchronized with firebase.
I have my trigger "when changes occur" made in the google sheet since my answers are automatically stored in there.
The Problem is, that the trigger does not get called, when a user is submitting the answers.
But if I write directly in the google sheet, my script gets called and data are stored in firebase.
But when I perform my script manually it also gets stored in firebase.
So it basically seems that the google sheet trigger does not get triggered when data are getting passed by the form itself.
Do I have to write a script for the form as well?
This is my script for the sheet:
function writeDataToFirebase() {
var ss = SpreadsheetApp.openById("SpreadsheetID");
var sheet = ss.getSheets()[0];
var data = sheet.getDataRange().getValues();
var dataToImport = {};
for(var i = 1; i < data.length; i++) {
var timeStamp = data[i][0];
var uuid = data[i][62];
dataToImport[timeStamp] = {
timeStamp:timeStamp,
uuid:uuid,
a:data[i][1],
b:data[i][2],
c:data[i][3],
d:data[i][4],
e:data[i][5],
f:data[i][6],
g:data[i][7],
var1:data[i][8],
var2:data[i][9],
var3:data[i][10],
var4:data[i][11],
var5:data[i][12],
var6:data[i][13],
var7:data[i][14],
var8:data[i][15],
var9:data[i][16]
};
}
var firebaseUrl = "URL" ;
var secret = "Secret
var base = FirebaseApp.getDatabaseByUrl(firebaseUrl, secret);
base.setData("", dataToImport);
}
Maybe someone can help me how I can fully automate this procedure
When using Apps Script triggers it is important to keep the following in mind:
Script executions and API requests do not cause triggers to run. For example, calling Range.setValue() to edit a cell does not cause the spreadsheet's onEdit trigger to run.
The same scenario applies to your situation when using the trigger you chose.
Since you want this function to run when you receive an answer in your form, the best approach in this situation is to use an onFormSubmit trigger.
Reference
Apps Script Triggers.
I am having problem with a function in IndexedDB, where I need to change the status of some meetings. The Search feature which meetings are checked by grabbing the ID of each one of them, soon after I A for() where I retrace the vector that contains the ids for each database access do I get a different passing the id of the time. The following code example:
var val = [];
var checkbox = $('input:checkbox[class^=checkReunioes]:checked');
if(checkbox.length > 0){
checkbox.each(function(){
val.push($(this).val());
});
}
for(var i = 0; i < val.length; i++){
var transaction = db.transaction(["tbl_REUNIOES"], "readwrite").objectStore("tbl_REUNIOES");
var request = transaction.get(val[i]);
request.onerror = function(event) {
alert("BAD");
};
request.onsuccess = function(event) {
var data = request.result;
data.FLG_STATU_REUNI = 'I';
var codigo_igreja = localStorage.getItem("igreja");
var dataJSON = JSON.stringify(data);
enviarFilaSincronismo("tbl_REUNIOES", "U", dataJSON, " WHERE COD_IDENT_REUNI = '" + val[i] + "' and COD_IDENT_IGREJ = '" + codigo_igreja + "'");
var requestUpdate = transaction.put(data);
requestUpdate.onerror = function(event) {
alert("OK");
};
requestUpdate.onsuccess = function(event) {
$("#listReunioes").html("");
serchAll(w_key_celula);
};
};
}
In my view the problem is occurring due to be a bank indexeddb asynchronous, it passes to the next search, even before the first stop.
But how can I do to confer this ?
What is the good practice for something in this case ?.
If you are inexperienced with writing asynchronous code, a good general rule to consider is to never define functions inside loops. Do not set request.onsuccess to a function from within the for loop.
You can perform multiple get and put requests on the same transaction when you do not expect the individual requests to fail for data-related reasons, such as the violation of a uniqueness constraint of an index, or because you are performing many thousands of requests on the same transaction and reaching processing limits.
You might find that using IDBObjectStore.prototype.openCursor together with IDBCursor.prototype.update is more convenient than using IDBObjectStore.prototype.get and IDBObjectStore.prototype.put.
Your example code indicates that a successful get request means that data was retrieved, when in fact, this is not what actually happens. A successful get request just means that a request occurred without errors (e.g. against an object store that exists, against a database that is not blocked by other requests, against a database connection that is still valid). It does not mean that an object matched your get request query. You should be checking for whether the request's result object is defined, and use that check as a determination of whether an object matched your get query, and not simply that a successful request occurred.
You might want to spend more time organizing your code into smaller functions that use clearer names. Your example code is difficult to read.
It looks like you are using some type of global db variable. If you are not well experienced with writing asynchronous code, avoid using a global db variable. There is no guarantee the db variable will be defined and open when you decide to access it, which could lead to an unexpected error.
I understand that Meteor methods let you do a client to server call, but what's the best approach to call another function or method from a Meteor method, i.e. a server to server call.
Right now if I do a regular JS function call it only works if the JS file is in the lib folder. But I need it to be in the server folder.
Here is the code
I have a topics collection which sits in the collection folder and has the following
I have the following which is a collection
Meteor.methods({
topicPost: function(topicAttributes) {
var user = Meteor.user(),
topicWithSameTitle = Topics.findOne({title: topicAttributes.title});
// ensure the user is logged in
if (!user)
throw new Meteor.Error(401, "You need to login to add a new topic");
Meteor.call('checkUser');
}
});
I then have the following method which sits in the server folder
Meteor.methods({
checkUser: function () {
alert('aaaa');
}
});
This works, but it's not a great solution. My method for handling this is to have all of my functions outside the Meteor.methods, and simply relay to the proper functions when necessary.
// Client
Meteor.call('foo');
And:
// Server
Meteor.methods({
foo: function() {
foo();
}
});
foo = function() {
foo = bar;
};
The advantage is that the foo fn can be called from anywhere on the server without a Meteor.call. Meanwhile, Meteor.methods only exposes what is absolutely necessary to the client.
[EDIT] There is some ambiguity as to which 'foo' you're talking about; obviously the server knows you mean the one outside the methods call. But if you're feeling confused, you can always rename one or the other. The advantage to this is that there is minimal refactoring involved.
Just to clarify for readers who don't notice that the OP's code actually contains the answer, you just do
Meteor.call('checkUser');
on the server. Per the meteor docs (https://docs.meteor.com/api/methods.html#Meteor-call), on the server, if you use Meteor.call() without a callback argument, the call runs synchronously and waits for the result. For example, if 'checkUser' was written to provide a userId value, you'd just do
let userId = Meteor.call('checkUser');
On the client, though, you have to provide a callback function as an argument to Meteor.call(), and the userId would be provided asynchronously to your callback function.
I have messages collection.
Each message has an userId.
I also defined displayUsername() function, that gets the id of user, and returns fullName.
My question is can I extend it with underscorejs on the server. or what is pratical way to extend an Object
messages = new Meteor.Collection("messages");
Meteor.publish("messages", function () {
var allMessages = messages.find({}).fetch();
return _.each(allMessages, function (msg) {
return _.extend(msg, {
username: displayName(msg.userId)
});
});
so I want
{{#each messages}}
<p><strong>{{username}}:</strong> {{messageBody}}</p>
{{/each}}
I know, that it is possible on the client side, but I am going to use it some more time...
thanks..
check transform on Collection.find
http://docs.meteor.com/#find
chris has a video tut talk about "Transforming Collection Documents"
The transform option on Meteor Collections allows us to transform MongoDB documents before they're returned in a fetch, findOne or find call, and before they are passed to observer callbacks. It lays the foundation for a Model layer. In this episode I'll build a simple transform class that has a formatPrice method for a price that is stored as cents in the database.
http://www.eventedmind.com/posts/meteor-transforming-collection-documents
Unfortunately you can't send down a transformed collection. But you can transform it on the client side.
e.g when you define your collection on the client:
client side js
var messages = new Meteor.Collection("messages", {transform:function(doc) {
doc.username = displayName(doc.userId);
return doc;
}});
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!