Within the Microsoft.Graph.User object there is a field called "AdditionalData".
It seems this can hold many values, from telling if a record is a delta record to storing manager information.
In this instance, it holds information on a users manager.
It looks like it can hold multiple records however, so I am asking what is the best way to get data from this property, to ensure I get all values it might have.
I am also unsure why manager information is in the AdditionalData property and not in the Manager property.
Yes you are correct AdditionalData may hold multiple record,You can add additionalData to your user that can hold any information based on your customization.
you can add the multiple value to additionalData using Openxtension
Trick is to add the extensions like this
extension = new OpenTypeExtension
{
ExtensionName = AzureADExtensions.UserConstants.ExtensionName,
AdditionalData = new Dictionary<string, object>
{
{"OtherEmail", externalUser.Email},
{"OtherRole" , externalUser.Roles.FirstOrDefault()}
}
};
await _graphClient.Users[user.Id].Extensions.Request()
.AddAsync(extension);
And then retrieve them like this.
user = await _graphClient
.Users[userId]
.Request()
.GetAsync();
// Note : you should be able to expand this on original request, but fails for me.
var extensions = await _graphClient.Users[user.Id].Extensions.Request().GetAsync();
user.Extensions = extensions;
Reference : Azure AD GraphServiceClient can't set AdditionalData against User
The "Additional Data" property only holds manager info if we do a delta query, if we do a regular query, we have to use extended properties to get the manager.
We are avoiding delta query for the moment in the interests of time but might come back to it at another point.
Thanks all.
Related
How to avoid #search.score from Azure Search result?
When I execute
var searchOptions = new SearchOptions
{
Select = { "id" },
};
await _searchClient.SearchAsync<object>("*", searchOptions);
each record returned has a property called #search.score
Is there a way to avoid it? I only need the id.
Based on the information provided here, I would say it is not possible to omit #search.score.
"#search.score": document_score (if a text query was provided)
Just thinking out loud, one possible way would be to have your search result return a typed model instead of a generic object. So you could create a class called MyDocument that has one public property called id.
When you do something like:
await _searchClient.SearchAsync<MyDocument>("*", searchOptions);
You will get a collection of MyDocument objects which will only have id property.
I have a requirement to make to make a file private and be available to only the user whose role name consists the name of the file for a specific custom object. For this I am trying to retrieve from Content Document Link with the custom object name LinkedEntity.Type and ContentDocumentid as filters, when I hard code the ContentDocumentid it is working fine but when I try to dynamically provide the ContentDocumentId then the query is not returning any result. I am adding a snippet of my code. Please Help!!. Thanks
List<Id> listOfConDocuId = new List<Id>();
for(ContentVersion cv: Trigger.new){
if((!cv.Title.contains('product proposal')) || (!cv.Title.contains('final')) || (!cv.Title.contains('packet')))
listOfConDocuId.add(cv.ContentDocumentId);
}
Map<Id, Project__c> mapOfProjectId = new Map<Id, Project__c>([SELECT Id FROM Project__c]);
Set<Id> setOfProjectId = mapOfProjectId.keySet();
List<ContentDocumentLink> LinkedProject = [SELECT ContentDocumentId, LinkedEntityId, ContentDocument.Title FROM ContentDocumentLink where LinkedEntityId in :setOfProjectId and LinkedEntity.Type='Project__c' and ContentDocumentId IN :listOfConDocuId];`
I don't think it's necessary to add a WHERE clause for both ID and TYPE. Id should be enough. As far as restricting files to only users with certain roles, have you tried sharing the Custom Object (Project__c) with only those users and then simply linking the files to that Custom Object record with Inferred Permission?
Read more about the sharing types and visibility of Content Document Link here:
https://developer.salesforce.com/docs/atlas.en-us.api.meta/api/sforce_api_objects_contentdocumentlink.htm
I'm currently developing a mobile application who uses a Google App Engine-hosted web service.
But i'm facing an issue. I just want to add a field in one my database's table.
App Engine doesn't use classic SQL syntax, but GQL. So i cannot use the ALTER TABLE statement. How can i do this with GQL ? I looked for a solution on the web, but there's not a lot of help.
public MyEntity() {
}
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.IDENTITY)
private Key idStation;
private String name;
private double longitude;
private double latitude;
private java.util.Date dateRefresh = new Date(); //the field i want to add in DB
So, now when i create a "MyEntity" object, it should add the "dateRefresh" field into the database... I create my object like this:
MyEntity station = new MyEntity();
station.setName("test");
station.setLatitude(0);
station.setLongitude(0);
station.setDateRefresh(new Date("01/01/1980"));
DaoFactory.getStationDao().addStation(station);
addStation method:
#Override
public MyEntity addStation(MyEntity station) {
EntityManager em = PersistenceManager.getEntityManagerFactory().createEntityManager();
try {
em.getTransaction().begin();
em.persist(station);
em.getTransaction().commit();
} finally {
if(em.getTransaction().isActive()) em.getTransaction().rollback();
em.close();
}
return station;
}
The field "dateRefresh" is never created into my DB...
Someone to help me please ?
Thanks in advance
Just add another field to your data structure, maybe providing a default clause, and that's all. For example, if you have a UserAccount:
class UserAccount(db.Model):
user = db.UserProperty()
user_id = db.StringProperty()
you may easily add:
class UserAccount(db.Model):
user = db.UserProperty()
user_id = db.StringProperty()
extra_info = db.IntegerProperty(default=0)
timezone = db.StringProperty(default="UTC")
and let it go.
While the datastore kinda mimics tables, data is stored on a per entity basis. There is no schema or table.
All you need to do is update your model class, and new entities will be saved with the structure (fields) of the new entity.
Old entities and indexes, however, are not automatically updated. They still have the same fields as they had when they were originally written to the datastore.
There's two ways to do this. One is to make sure your code can handle situations where your new properties are missing, ie make sure no exceptions are thrown, or handle the exceptions properly when you're missing the properties.
The second way is to write a little function (usu a mapreduce function) to update every entity with appropriate or null values for your new properties.
Note that indexes are not updated unless the entity is written. So if you add a new indexed property, old entities won't show up when you query for the new property. In this case, you must use the second method and update all the entities in the datastore so that they are indexed.
When you change data models on the app engine to add new properties those entries without a certain property are listed with the value <missing> in the online data viewer.
What I'm wondering is how can I write a query to find those entries?
There is no direct way to query for older entities with missing attribute, but you can design data model upfront to support this. Add a version attribute to each model class. Version should have a default value, which is increased every time model class is changed and deployed. This way you will be able to query entities by version number.
There's no way to query the datastore for entities that don't have a given property. You need to iterate over all the entities and check each one - possibly by using the mapreduce API.
Or you could create a script to stick null in there for all current items that don't have that property using the low level datastore API, so then you can query on null.
I had this issue and that's how I solved it. The rough code would look like:
DatastoreService datastore = DatastoreServiceFactory.getDatastoreService();
Query query = new Query("JDOObjectType");
List<Entity> results = datastore.prepare(query).asList(FetchOptions.Builder.withLimit(9999));
for (Entity lObject : results) {
Object lProperty = lObject.getProperty("YOUR_PROPERTY");
if (lProperty == null) {
lObject.setProperty("YOUR_PROPERTY", null);
datastore.put(lProperty);
}
}
}
I have a problem with Linq and ObservableCollections in my WPF application.
Context of the problem:
I've created a very simple SQL database with two tables: User and BankAccounts.
The User Table has an one-to-many relationship with the BankAccounts Table. Next I've created Linq-to-SQL dataclasses, which worked fine ==> the assosiation between the two tables was detected as well.
Next I've created a function to retreive all Users which works fine:
DataClassesDataContext dc = new DataClassesDataContext
var query = from u in dc.Users
select u;
Now suppose I want to add a new BankAccount to each user (not very likely but still).
I could add the following code
for each(User u in query)
{
u.BankAccounts.Add(New BankAccount());
}
The above works all fine. The BankAccounts property is automaticly part of the User class, due to the assosiation in the database and Linq DataClasses.
However, in my application I first add the query results to an ObservableCollection. Hereby I could use all sorts off databinding and changenotification. This is accomplished by the following code;
ObservableCollection<User> oUsers = new ObservableCollection<User>(query);
Problem: Within the ObservableCollection I can't do anyting with the users BankAccounts property because it is now of type EntitySet<>. So I can't do the following statement anymore.
for each(User u in oUsers)
{
u.BankAccounts.Add(New BankAccount());
}
Somehow, when queryresults are added to an observablecollection It is not possible to acces the user.BankAccounts properties anymore. However, it is possible to bind the BankAccounts Property to any control, like a listbox, and it contains the correct data.
Does someone now how I can create an observableCollction (or similar collection) from wich I can access these "assosiated" properties? I'm realy looking forward for to a solution.
Thanks in advance!
Best regards,
Bas Zweeris
E: Bas.Zweeris#Capgemini.com
Keep track of the original query which will implement IQueryable, you can run any further queries you need against that.
The ObservableCollection should just be for WPF to have something to bind to - its very useful if you want to add a new collection item but not have it pushed to the database before the user has had chance to edit it.
eg.
// Create a new blank client type
var ct = new ClientType()
{
IsArchived = false,
Description = "<new client type>",
Code = "CT000",
CanLoginOnline = true
};
// Tell the data source to keep track of this object
db.ClientTypes.InsertOnSubmit(ct);
// Also add the object to the observable collection so that it can immediately be shown in the UI and editted without hitting the db
clienttypes.Add(ct);