I have a react-redux application this has the following code structure, which is running correctly.
class Customers extends Component{
state = {
showAddCustomerForm : false
}
toggleAddCustomerForm = ()=>{
this.setState({showAddCustomerForm: !this.state.showAddCustomerForm})
}
render(){
return (
<Fragment>
<AddCustomerForm />
<Datatable
options={{
data: this.props.customers,
buttons: [
{
extend: 'csv',
text: '<i class="fa fa-file-excel-o"></i>Excel'
},
{
text: 'Add Customer',
action: this.toggleAddCustomerForm
}
],
columns: [
{ data: "name" },
{ data: "email" },
{ data: "mobile", "defaultContent": "<i>Not set</i>" },
{ data: "landline", "defaultContent": "<i>Not set</i>"}
]
}}
filter="true"
className="table table-striped table-bordered"
width="100%"
/>
</Fragment>
)
}
}
The Datatable Component uses the redux store for rendering the table. When I add a new Customer using the AddCustomerForm I update Redux store. This actually changes the application state, So I expect the Datatable Component to RE-Render and show me the new customer in the table. however, this does not happen. If I hit it shows me correctly.
I understand that both React and jQuery Datatables manage DOM independently, but I am sure there must be a way to use datatables in a rerenderable component...
Please help..
For datatables fed by HTML or JavaScript source, I'm afraid, there's no way to re-render datatable upon source data modification.
However, it is rather good news from the standpoint of data consistency across multiple clients who might use your application simultaneously. To maintain that, you may use AJAX requests to update back-end data which all the users refer to and, upon successful update, throw ajax.reload() to sync your client with backend.
If, for some reason, you might wish to update your datatable locally, you may consider cleaning table contents and re-populating it with your data, like that:
//datatable initialization
var datatable = $('#mytable').DataTable({
data: myDataArray
});
//source data modification
myDataArray.push({
attr1: "value",
attr2: "value"...
});
//purge datatable contents
datatable.clear();
//re-populate datatable
$.each(myDataArray, function () {
datatable.row().add(this);
});
//re-render up to date datatable
datatable.draw();
You can update datatable by implementing the "componentDidUpdate" function of your component. Example:
componentDidUpdate=()=>{
//console.log("Component did update");
if (this.props.customers.length>0){
this.createTable()
this.updateTable();
}
};
Then implement the function for updating data. E.g
updateTable=()=>{
let table=$('#mytable').DataTable();
table.clear();
table.rows.add(this.props.consumers).draw();
}
I would also create the table using javascript rather than in the JSX. That way you can destroy the table and create it afresh every time you want to update
createTable=()=>{
if ( $.fn.DataTable.isDataTable( '#mytable' ) ) {
$('#mytable').DataTable().destroy();
}
let table=$('#mytable').DataTable({
"columns":columns,
});
And the JSX would only contain the id of the table
<table id="mytable">
Related
Here is the issue I am having. I am trying to have the Ag-grid render it's html output using NextJS getServerSideProps. However, when I view the source code, it doesn't appear to have any of the HTML rendered for SEO purposes. If I go ahead and output the "staff" array to a div then the HTML output is viewable in the source code so at least I know the function is working. Is there something I need to do to have AGGridReact render its contents?
export default function Home({ staff }) {
const gridRef = useRef();
const defaultColDef = {
resizable: true,
sortable: true,
};
const [columnDefs] = useState([
{ headerName: 'First Name', field: 'first_name' },
{ headerName: 'Last Name', field: 'last_name' },
{ headerName: 'Job Title', field: 'job_title' },
{ field: 'office' },
{ field: 'email' },
{ field: 'phone' },
]);
return (
<>
<main>
<div style={{ height: '600px' }}>
<AgGridReact
id='staff_grid'
ref={gridRef}
rowData={staff}
defaultColDef={defaultColDef}
columnDefs={columnDefs}
rowSelection={'single'}
style={{ height: '100%', width: '100%' }}
></AgGridReact>
</div>
</main>
</>
);
}
// This gets called on every request
export async function getServerSideProps() {
const staff = [];
for (let id = 1; id <= 3; id++) {
staff.push({
id: id,
first_name: 'first' + id,
last_name: 'last' + id,
email: 'member' + id + '#company.com',
phone: '12345' + id,
office: 'place' + id,
job_title: 'Worker ' + id,
});
}
// Pass data to the page via props
return { props: { staff } };
}
TLDR: Diving deep into the ag-grid's node_modules abyss and into their documentation, I found that their grid component is being injected into the DOM (client-side) once an "AG Grid" wrapper component has been mounted. Therefore, this is a client-side only component.
Debugging
When I request the Next page from Postman, I see an empty div where the grid should be:
But when I request the page from the browser, I see the grid:
An even easier way to determine that this is a client-side only component would be to assign the grid a debug prop:
<AgGridReact
debug
rowData={staff}
columnDefs={columnDefs}
rowSelection="single"
/>
We see AG Grid debug logs in the browser (Notice the Rendered on Client message):
But, we don't see any AG Grid debug logs on the server (Notice the Rendered on Server message):
More investigation
I thought I found a server-side rendering solution via their Row Models, but unfortunately it's not referring to the table being SSR'd, but the data being lazy loaded via dynamically fetching data from a server. My guess as to why this table is client-side only is that AG Grid doesn't use a native table, but instead a bunch of div elements with custom styles to represent a table. Since the server doesn't have a DOM (eg, can't access document nor window), calculating these dynamic styles wouldn't be possible.
Alternatives
If you're creating this table for an enterprise and it's absolutely vital to have this page SSR'd for SEO, then I'd recommend having some sort of bot detection in Next's middleware and within gSSP. Then pass an isBot prop to the component and conditionally render a native table (styling won't matter since it's mainly used for SEO). We do something similar for our web application where search results need to be baked into the page on the server, but can be lazy-loaded client-side for a snappier UX.
Here's a working demo. You can change the User-Agent using your browser's tools or by changing it within the request headers.
A more comprehensive bot list can be found here.
What a user sees:
What a bot sees:
I followed this video on the best practices for creating flat databases with firestore: Converting SQL structures to Firebase structures
I came up with something that looks like this:
const firestore = {
events: {
eventID: { // Doc
description: "Event Description", // Field
title: "Event Title", // Field
}
},
eventComments: { // Collection
eventID: { // Doc
comments: { // Field
commentID1: true, // Value
commentID2: true, // Value
commentID3: true, // Value
}
}
},
comments: { // Collection
commentID1: { // Doc
createdAt: "Timestamp", // Field
createdBy: "uid", // Field
content: "Comment Body" // Field
},
commentID2: {...},
commentID3: {...},
},
};
I'm not sure what the best way to get the related data is however
I'm using react and react-redux-firestore to access the data. My current setup for the app looks like this
<EventsDetailPage>
<Comments>
<Comment />
<Comment />
<Comment />
</Comments>
</EventsDetailPage>
I've come up with two potential methods...
Method 1
I have useFirestoreConnect in each component. The top level gets the event and passes the eventID to the comments component, the comments component uses the eventID to get the eventComments list which passes the individual commentID for each comment to the comment component, then finally the individual comment component uses the commentID to get the relevant comment data.
My issue with this: Wouldn't this mean that there is a listener for the event, comment list, and every individual comment? Is that frowned upon?
EX: This would be in the event, the comments, and comment component but each with respective values
useFirestoreConnect(() => [
{collection: 'events', doc: eventID},
]);
const event = useSelector(({firestore: {data}}) => data.events && data.events[eventID]);
Method 2
Let's say I have a list of events, I can do a query to get the lists
useFirestoreConnect(() => [{
collection: 'events',
orderBy: ["createdAt", "desc"],
limitTo: 10
}]);
const events = useSelector(({ firestore: { ordered } }) => ordered.events);
This is great because I believe it's one listener but if any of the data is changed in any of the events the listener will still respond to the changes.
My issue with this: I don't know how to do a where clause that would return all events for a given list of IDs.
So like say if I wanted to get a list of events with where: ['id', '==', ['eventID1', 'eventID2', 'eventID3']]
To retrieve up to 10 items by their ID, you can use an in query:
.where('id', 'in', ['eventID1', 'eventID2', 'eventID3'])
If you have more than 10 IDs, you'll have to run multiple of these queries.
I have custom table with a filters property. 3 of the filters are hard coded, but 1 of the filters is gathered through a POST request from our API because their filter options are frequently updated in our database by non-engineering folks.
My issue is that when you hit the back button to get to the page with this custom table, a duplicate Gateways filters is added to the page. This item disappears when you refresh the page, which demonstrated to me that I am running into an issue with the State. How can I make it so the Gateways filter is only displayed once?
Here is the code for the table:
<CredcapTable
defaultSort="created_at"
cols={cols}
filters={filters}
searchFunc={this.searchFunc}
recordMappingFunc={this.recordMappingFunc}
/>
Here is the function that pulls the Gateways filters from the database, which is called in componentDidMount:
private loadFilters = () => {
searchGateways(this.props.app.api, new SearchRequest()).then((res: SearchResults<Gateway>) => {
const opts = new Array<any>();
opts.push({ label: "All", value: "*" });
res.results.map((g: Gateway) => {
opts.push({ label: `${g.name} [${g.code}]`, value: g.id });
});
filters.push({
field: "gateway_id",
label: "Gateway",
options: opts
});
this.setState({ filters });
});
};
Edit: Fixed JSFiddle Link
So i've been playing with Backbone and Marionette since a couple of weeks. I did some courses on Udemy, read the docs for both Backbone and Marionette. I can grasp most of the logic but somehow my mind can't wrap itself around the best way to approach a SPA I am trying to create.
API
So I have a rest api that returns some data:
http://localhost:3000/index
returns the following:
[
{
"id": 1,
"magazineTitle": "Title",
"magazineEditie": "Date",
"indexTitle": "Index Title",
"indexSubtitle": "Index Subtitle",
"mediaType": "image", //can also be "video"
"mainMedia": "https://source.unsplash.com/B0iF3I4bLBQ"
}
]
What I want
I want to be able to use this response and populate it over 2 seperate views.
one view will use the data to create a navigation bar
the other view will use it to create a hero header
What I can't seem to understand
Somehow I can't wrap my head around how this would be set up without making this 'illogical'
I feel like loading 2 views with the same model inside my Marionette.Application doesn't make any sense? Or the fact that I fetch my Collections and/or Models there...
I need some help clearing up some Layout issues and best practices I guess.
My code
Besides the fact that I get the data from a localhost url and I have my app setup with webpack this is more or less the code that I am using:
JSFiddle Demo
I have figured out what I needed to do. Based on the documentation (which was kind of confusing me) I figured out a way to render two views with it's needed data.
I was using a CollectionView to read a single data point (1 model) I somehow couldn't figure out a way to immediately get a single Model.
So far the model I had to do:
index.model.js
const IndexModel = Backbone.Model.extend({
urlRoot: "http://localhost:3000/index",
default: {
id: 1,
magazineTitle: "Mag Title",
magazineEditie: "Date",
indexTitle: "Title",
indexSubtitle: "Subtitle",
mediaType: "image",
mainMedia: "http://placehold.it/1900x800/",
},
});
The urlRoot argument here is what I need to do the exact call.
Then I was still confused how to structure my app but I ultimately used Regions and Marionette.View to setup the application.
App.js
export default Marionette.Application.extend({
region: "#content",
onBeforeStart() {
const router = new Router();
},
onStart() {
this.showView(new AppView());
},
});
app.view.js
const AppView = Marionette.View.extend({
tagName: "main",
id: "app",
template: template,
regions: {
navigationRegion: "#main-navigation",
appRegion: "#main-region",
pagesRegion: "#pages-region",
},
initialize() {
this.headerData = new IndexModel({ id: 1 });
this.pagesData = new PagesCollection();
},
onRender() {
this.showChildView("appRegion", new HeroView({ model: this.headerData, }));
this.showChildView("pagesRegion", new PagesView({ collection: this.pagesData, }));
},
});
I had to create a wrapping AppView that utilises regions to specify where child views should render.
Given is a nested model structure like this:
Model Website
+ id
+ name
+ images[] // List of Image instances
Model Image
+ imageName
+ imageUrl
A serialised version of the response looks like:
{
"id": 4711,
"name": "Some name",
"images" [
{"imageName": "Beach", "imageUrl": "http://example.com/whatever.jpg"},
...
]
}
This nested model set is persisted in a document store and is returned on request by Website.id.
There is no by-id-relation to the nested list of images, as they are persisted as a list directly in the parent model. As far as I know, the classic relations in Ext.data.Model refer to the related models via a by-id-relation.
The question is: Is there any way that I can tell the parent model to use the Image model for each of the children in it's images list?
As a first step, you can make your images data to be loaded into the model by using a field type of auto:
Ext.define('My.Model', {
extend: 'Ext.data.Model'
,fields: [
{name: 'images', type: 'auto'}
// ... other fields
}
});
Then:
myModel.get('images');
Should return:
[
{"imageName": "Beach", "imageUrl": "http://example.com/whatever.jpg"},
...
]
From there, you should theoretically be able to implement a fully automatized solution to creates the models from this data, and -- the hardest part -- try to keep these created records and the children data in the parent model synchronized. But this is a very involved hack, and a lot of entry points in Ext code base have to be covered. As an illustration, I once tried to do that for "has one" relations, and that represent a lot of code. As a result, I never took the time to consolidate this code, and finally never used it.
I would rather advocate for a simple and local (to the model) solution. You can add a simple method to your model to get the images as records. For example:
Ext.define('My.Model', {
// ...
,getImages: function() {
var store = this.imageStore;
if (!store) {
store = new Ext.data.Store({
model: 'My.ImageModel'
,data: this.get('images') || []
});
this.imageStore = store;
}
return store;
}
});
Creating a store for the associated model will save you from having to play with the proxy and the reader. It also gives you an interface that is close to Ext's default one for associations.
If you need support for loading images more than once for the same parent record, you can hook on the field's convert method.
Finally, you may also need to handle client-side modifications of associated data, in order to be able to save them to the server. If your associated model allows it, you could simply use the children store's sync method (and don't forget to update the parent model's data in the sync callback!). But if your associated model isn't connected to an endpoint on the server-side, you should be able to hook on the serialize method to save the data in the associated store (as opposed to the one stored in the parent record, that won't get updated if you work with the associated store).
Here's a last example showing both:
Ext.define('My.Model', {
extend: 'Ext.data.Model'
,fields: [
{
name: 'images'
,type: 'auto'
// enables associated data update
,convert: function(data) {
var store = this.imageStore;
if (store) {
store.loadData(data || []);
}
return data;
}
// enables saving data from the associated store
,serialize: function(value, record) {
var store = record.imageStore,
if (store) {
// care, the proxy we want is the associated model's one
var writer = store.proxy && store.proxy.writer;
if (writer) {
return Ext.Array.map(store.getRange(), function(record) {
return writer.getRecordData(record);
});
} else {
// gross implementation, simply use the records data object
return Ext.pluck(store.getRange(), 'data');
}
} else {
return record.get('images');
}
}
}
// ... other fields
}
,getImages: function() {
var store = this.imageStore;
if (!store) {
store = new Ext.data.Store({
model: 'My.ImageModel'
,data: this.get('images') || []
});
this.imageStore = store;
}
return store;
}
});
Please notice that I haven't tested this code, so it might still contains some mistakes... But I hope it will be enough to give you the general idea!