How do I provide visibility to records for users based on field criteria?
My demand is: When I have some specific object Files with some specific products the users that contact in this accounts that have this product will see this register of Files. Like:
I create a register on the object File with the field product fill with 'B'';
The account with some specific record type also has the field product filled with 'B' and 'C';
Because of that, the contacts (that are users in the community) present on this account will have access to the object File, because it contains 'B'.
How to reach this solution? I think about a trigger on the object File that will check the accounts that contain the same product, and then, create a sharing rule for that, but I don`t know if is the best option and also, because of the limit of 300. It's that any other way?
Uh, interesting one! You mean real Files (ContentDocument, ContentVersion), not some custom object, right? Files are bit tricky, normally community user would see all files attached to their account + special "Asset" files.
trigger on the object File (...) and then create a sharing rule
Don't think it'll work. Sharing rules are metadata, not data. You'd need a deployment or cheat by making API callout. But also sharing rules don't really work for community, you're supposed to use sharing sets.
You could try making ContentDocumentLinks between the file header (ContentDocument) and Account. And yes, you should be able to do it from trigger. I don't remember if there are limitations like 1 file can be linked at most to X records, this might be tricky. a change of Account's product would potentially mean lots of links to add/remove, maybe move this bit to #future / Queueable.
Alternatively you could just make all files & their folders visible in the community, maybe even for guest user (look into Asset files?). And just show / hide links to their folders based on what's on the account. Bit "security by obscurity" but well, fairly easy to do, adding/removing products wouldn't mean lots of operations. Depends if these files are somewhat sensitive or it's more about guiding the user to what they're interested in.
Ask on https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/ too, somebody can have even better ideas.
Related
I have a database table with an autoincrement ID as primary key.
For each record of this table, I can have up to 3 files, which can be publicly available so random filename generation is not mandatory, and these files are optional.
I think I have 2 possible solutions:
Store a random generated filename in 3 nullable varchar column and store all the files in the same place:
columns: a | b | c
uploads/f6se54fse654.jpg
Don't store the filenames, but place them in specific folders and name them the same than the primary key value:
uploads/a/1.jpg
uploads/b/1.jpg
uploads/c/1.jpg
With this last solution, I know that uploads/a/1.jpg belongs to record with ID 1, and is a file of type a. But I have to check if the file exists because the files are optional.
Do you think there is a good practice in all that? Or maybe there is a better approach?
If the files you are talking about are intended to be displayed or downloaded by users (whether for visitors or for authenticated users, filtered by roles (ACL) or not), it is important to ensure (IMHO) that the user will not be able to guess other information other than the content of the concerned resource which has been sent to him. There is no perfect solution that can be applied to all cases without exception, so let's take an example to give you more explanations.
In order to enhance the security and total opacity of sensitive data, for example for the specific case of uploads/users/7/invoices/3.pdf, I think it would be wise to ensure that absolutely no one can guess the number of files that are potentially associated with the user or any other entity (because otherwise, in this example, we could imagine that there potentially are other accessible files - 1.pdf and 2.pdf). By design, we generally want to give access to files in a well defined and specific cases and context. However, this may not be the case for an image file which is intended to be seen by everyone (a profile photo, for example). That's why the context matters in some way.
If you choose to keep the auto-incremented identifiers as names to refer to your files, this can also give information about the size of the data stored in your database (/uploads/invoices/128.pdf informs that you may already have 127 invoices on your server) and potentially motivate unscrupulous people to try to reach resources that should never be fetched out of the defined context. This case may be less obvious if you choose to use some kind of unique generated identifiers (GUID).
I recommend that you read this article concerning the generation of (G)/(U)UIDs (a 128-bit hexadecimal numbers) to be stored in your database for each uploaded or created file. If you use MySQL in its latest version it is even possible to host this identifier in a binary (16) type which offers an automatic conversion to UUID, I let you read this interesting topic associated with what I refer about. It will probably output this as /uploads/invoices/b0016303-8e4f-487a-8c30-5dddf1ebf7e9.pdf which is a lot better as long as you ensure that the generated identifier is unique hash.
It does not seem useful to me here to talk about performance issues because today there are many methods for caching files or path and urls, which avoid having to make requests each time in a lot of cases where a resource is called (often ordered by their popularity rank in bigdata cases).
Last, but not least, many web and mobile platform applications (I think of Slack, Discord, Facebook, Twitter...) which store a lot of media files every day which are often associated with accounts users, both public and confidential files and information, generate a unique hash for each of them.
Twitter is using its own unique identifier string (64-bits BIGINT) generator called Twitter Snowflake which you might be interesting to read too. It is based on the UNIX epoch value which is, by definition, unique at each millisecond tick.
There isn't a global and perfect solution which can be applied for everything but I hope that this will help you as you may want to take a deeper look in this and find the "best solution" for each context and entity you'll store and link files.
I was trying to implement a system where a user can save custom configurations.
My query to the teacher was "Why should I allow the user to have multiple custom configurations that are 100% same with different names?" To this query, my teacher responded with an example of the file system where I can save multiple duplicate files.
I am not very convinced by this response although it is true.
I want to know why do we allow the user to save duplicate files or in my case duplicate configurations? I believe it is just redundancy and wastage of available space which can be avoided.
Two configurations may be the same today, but next week one of them will be changed to do something different. Until then, it is a good idea to get used to loading ConfigA for JobA, and ConfigB for JobB. They are the same now, but next week ConfigB will change.
I have an architecture issue related to localization. My concern is what is the best approach to store and manage localized user data. Let me explain:
I have an AngularJS webapp with a mysql database. For text translations we are using angular-translate with files. For labels, static text, etc is working great.
In the other hand, the user can create items (i.e. houses for rent) and fill a title and description for it. He also is able to edit that information. This information is gathered by a form and stored in DB at the moment.
We would like to provide translations for these user input data and with this scenario in mind, I see two approaches:
User stores data in his language in DB. We store the translations in DB (translations tables...) and provides translations from there.
User stores data in his language in DB. We store the translations in locale.json files and create an key in database to get those translations (angular-translate).
In both scenarios we need to translate whether the user creates or updates a title or description. But it looks like if you store it in database, at least you already have one default translation. If you store it in a json file, you are keeping the default translation data in two places.
From the maintainance point of view, to use the translation files looks a little more complex at first sight. Also, take into account each time a user input text is added or updated a deployment needs to be done.
However, from the performance point of view, probably the translation files is a better approach. Probably you are saving at least one query to the DB when the user change the language.
From the architectural point of view, I would say the user data should be stored in database.
What do you think?
Always store the user input.
Store the translation in DB only if you ALWAYS needs it.
If you rarely needs to do it offer a Transalation button for the user.
Do what's cheaper. If you got only one in a thousand inputs in another language and it's rarely visited there's no sense in wasting precious DB space, let it be done on the fly by demand.
Also how do you know it needs to be translated? Some people are billingual and there are cases where a abroad tourist is (strugling to) using a device set in another language.
Obs:.
Do You knows automatic translations are crap don't you? So how are you translating?
TL;DR: option 1. You may cache access to the translation tables or create materialised views (if your DBMS supports them) to denormalise your Property entity and have one readily-translated row per language.
Personally, I do not see the need for caching - how many times is the user going to change language, in production?
For quite a while I am struggling with how to save custom user specific arrays of data in Mailchimp.
Simple example: I want to save the project ids for a user in Mailchimp and in best case be able to use them there properly as well. Let's say user fritz#frey.com has the 5 project ids 12345, 25345, 21342, 23424 and 48935. Why is there no array merge field that let's me save this array of project ids to a user?! (Or is there one and I am just blind...)
I know I can do drop down fields to put users in multiple groups, like types of projects for example, but the solution can hardly be a drop down with all (several thousand) project ids and I check the ones the user is a part of (and I doubt that Mailchimp would support that solution for a large number of group items anyways).
Oh and of course I could make the field myself by abusing a string field and connect the project ids with commas or a json string but that seems neither like a clean solution nor could I use the data properly in Mailchimp (as far as I know).
I googled quite a bit and couldn't find anything helpful sadly... :(
So? Can anybody enlighten me? :)
Thanks for all your help!
It sounds like you have already arrived at the correct answer: there is no "array" type, other than the interests type, which is global and not quite the same as an array.
The best solution here sort of depends on your data. If each project ID will have many different subscribers attached to it, and there won't be too many of them active at any given time, I'd just use interests. If you think there may be dozens of project ids active simultaneously, I'd not store this data on the subscribers at all, instead I'd build static segments for each project, and add users to them.
If projects won't have a bunch of subscribers associated, I'd store the data on your end and/or continue using the comma-separated string field.
I'm creating a text-based browser game and need some advice for django model structure. All the examples are from the same project, therefore I will not repeat the same information assuming you've read all the questions from the top to the bottom.
First question
I have an auth app which contains user profile (Player model), alliance app which holds information about all the unions players join and medals app which represents rewards for both players and alliances.
Both users and alliances can have medals assigned so one of the options is to create a M2M field in Player and Alliance models linking to Medal.
Another option would make medals app usable in any other project of mine. This approach includes the use of generic relations in Medal model which links to either Player or Alliance.
Which solution is more django-like or can I do however I want to?
Second question
There will be tasks for players to accomplish. The scenarios of tasks vary greatly, therefore I need some kind of approach to write unique task progress checking code for each task.
Tasks are held in the database containing information about rewards (which are pretty much the same). Where should I write unique code for each task? Maybe I should add some fields and eval() them later? Then all the information will be held in the DB.
Moreover, tasks demand some tracking, for example, imagine a simple task of going to the manual section (just to make sure the player knows where it is). Then I need to register somewhere whether the player has visited manual page or not. I think about creating another model TaskTrackers in task app. Then another question arises. If I should add OneToOne field from Player to TaskTrackers or vice versa?
To sum up, the main question is whether should I add OneToOneFields/M2M fields to user profile model or add OneToOneFields/Foreigneys from target models to User model? The latter would make my apps more reusable, but the first approach may be more logical.
Waiting for answers.
One your first question, you could do either an M2M to Medal, or use a generic foreign key. You'll end up with a couple of join tables with M2M. With the generic foreign key, you won't have any join tables, but you will have the extra query for the content type. So, you may need to set up both ways and see which is going to impact performance more
On your second question, I might take the approach of using a "Task" model with one or more "Step" models that can be set up as an inline formset. Then you'll need a table like "CompletedPlayerTasks" or something like that, which contains the Player ID, Task ID and Step ID. If a Step ID exists in that table, the task has been completed.
It sounds like you need to be able to create custom fields and forms for the Steps of each Task, which isn't terribly hard to do in Django. There are some off the shelf solutions to do this, but you might need to write your own.
Lastly, I wouldn't name the app that holds your user profiles "auth", which could cause a namespace problem with Django's contrib.auth app. I would name it "profiles", just so it's more obvious what that app does and contains.
Hope that gives you some ideas.