I am very puzzled on the result returned by the Database.getQueryLocator().
global Database.QueryLocator start(Database.BatchableContext BC) {
string query = 'Select Label, Batch_Name__c, SObject_Name__c, External_system__c from Batch_Upload_Config__mdt where Is_Active__c = true';
System.debug(query);
return Database.getQueryLocator(query);
}
In the Query Editor, I entered the exact query and did get the correct data back. However when running the batch, instead of returning the records with 'Is_Active__c = true', it returns the records with 'Is_Active__c = false'.
Any pointers will be appreciated.
Looks like this is related to query on custom metadata types. When I changed to use custom object, I was able to get the correct result using Database.getQueryLocator().
Related
I’m a beginner in Laravel but have a problem at first. I wrote this query and I’m waiting for Sonya Bins as result but unexpectedly I see ["Sonya Bins"]. what’s the problem?
Route::get('products', function () {
$articles=DB::table('users')->where('id','2')->get()->pluck('name');
return view('products',compact('articles'));
});
pluck will return array if you want to get only single value then use value
// will return array
$articles=DB::table('users')->where('id','2')->get()->pluck('name');
//will return string
$articles=DB::table('users')->where('id','2')->value('name');
// output Sonya Bins
here is an example from the documentation:
if you don't even need an entire row, you may extract a single value from a record using the value method. This method will return the value of the column directly:
$email = DB::table('users')->where('name', 'John')->value('email');
Read more about it here
Hope it helps.
Thanks
pluck() used to return a String before Laravel 5.1, but now it returns an array.
The alternative for that behavior now is value()
Try this:
Route::get('products', function () {
$articles=DB::table('users')->where('id','2')->get()->value('name');
return view('products',compact('articles'));
});
I think it's easier to use the Model + find function + value function.
Route::get('products', function () {
$articles = User::find(2)->value('name');
return view('products',compact('articles'));
});
pluck will return the collection.
I think id is your primary key.
You can just get the first record, and call its attribute's name:
DB::table('users')->where('id','2')->first()->name;
or
DB::table('users')->find(2)->name;
First thing is that you used invalid name for what you pass to view - you don't pass articles but user name.
Second thing is that you use get method to get results instead of first (or find) - you probably expect there is only single user with id = 2.
So to sum up you should use:
$userName = DB::table('users')->find(2)->name;
return view('products',compact('userName'));
Of course above code is for case when you are 100% sure there is user with id = 2 in database. If it might happen there won't be such user, you should use construction like this:
$userName = optional(DB::table('users')->find(2))->name;
($userName will be null if there is no such record)
or
$userName = optional(DB::table('users')->find(2))->name ?? 'No user';
in case you want to use custom string.
Executing below code returns the result that contains the element of type hashmap instead of type T (the basicDBList coming from mongoDB does not have "_class" attribute:
com.mongodb.BasicDBList basicDBList = // output of mongoDB query;
List<T> result = mongoOperations.getConverter().read(List.class, basicDbList);
Is there any way to provide type information of List to the read method ?
Not exactly clear what you're trying to achieve, but if you acquired your BasicDBList by calling the getRawResults().get("result") of an AggregationResults instance, you can instead call getMappedResults:
Aggregation aggregation = Aggregation.newAggregation(...);
AggregationResults<Foo> r = mongoTemplate.aggregate(aggregation, "foos", Foo.class);
List<Foo> foos = r.getMappedResults();
Consider this simple query which use full text searching on the Keywords field:
DECLARE #searchTerm VARCHAR(500) = 'painted'
SELECT * FROM StockCatalogueItems
WHERE (CONTAINS(KeyWords, #searchTerm))
This works as expected, but I need to do the same using a Dapper.net parameterised query. When using stored procedures, I create the full text parameter like this: "\"painted*\""
But using the same approach this doesn't work using dapper. No results are returned. This is the line in the query where I use the parameter:
AND (CONTAINS(KeyWords, #search))
and it's passed to the query like so:
return _context.Database.Connection.Query<StockProfileMatrix>(basequery, new
{
search = searchTerm
}
I can only assume that dapper is sanitising the string somehow, removing quotes perhaps?
Any ideas?
This works for me. However the tech stack am working on is .net core RTM and "Dapper": "1.50.0-rc3",
_dbConnection.QueryAsync<Guid>(#"select br.Id from Brand br where CONTAINS(br.Text,#Name)",new {Name = $"\"*{name}*\""}))
For completeness, I'll answer the question. The query syntax is correct, but the way in which the full-text parameter is created was obviously not. I created an extension method that formats the parameter:
public static string ToFullText(this string str)
{
string searchTerm = null;
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(str))
{
string[] keywords = str.Trim().Split(null);
foreach (var keyword in keywords)
{
searchTerm += string.Format("\"{0}*\" AND ", keyword);
}
if (searchTerm != null)
searchTerm = searchTerm.Substring(0, searchTerm.LastIndexOf(" AND "));
}
return searchTerm;
}
Then I call the method when I pass the parameter in to the dapper query:
_context.Database.Connection.Query<dynamic>(query, new
{
search = filter.SearchTerm.ToFullText()
});
I have a large solr index, and I have noticed some fields are not updated correctly (the index is dynamic).
This has resulted in some fields having an empty "id" field.
I have tried these queries, but they didn't work:
id:''
id:NULL
id:null
id:""
id:
id:['' TO *]
Is there a way to query empty fields?
Thanks
Try this:
?q=-id:["" TO *]
One caveat! If you want to compose this via OR or AND you cannot use it in this form:
-myfield:*
but you must use
(*:* NOT myfield:*)
This form is perfectly composable. Apparently SOLR will expand the first form to the second, but only when it is a top node. Hope this saves you some time!
According to SolrQuerySyntax, you can use q=-id:[* TO *].
If you have a large index, you should use a default value
<field ... default="EMPTY" />
and then query for this default value.
This is much more efficient than q=-id:["" TO *]
You can also use it like this.
fq=!id:['' TO *]
If you are using SolrSharp, it does not support negative queries.
You need to change QueryParameter.cs (Create a new parameter)
private bool _negativeQuery = false;
public QueryParameter(string field, string value, ParameterJoin parameterJoin = ParameterJoin.AND, bool negativeQuery = false)
{
this._field = field;
this._value = value.Trim();
this._parameterJoin = parameterJoin;
this._negativeQuery = negativeQuery;
}
public bool NegativeQuery
{
get { return _negativeQuery; }
set { _negativeQuery = value; }
}
And in QueryParameterCollection.cs class, the ToString() override, looks if the Negative parameter is true
arQ[x] = (qp.NegativeQuery ? "-(" : "(") + qp.ToString() + ")" + (qp.Boost != 1 ? "^" + qp.Boost.ToString() : "");
When you call the parameter creator, if it's a negative value. Simple change the propertie
List<QueryParameter> QueryParameters = new List<QueryParameter>();
QueryParameters.Add(new QueryParameter("PartnerList", "[* TO *]", ParameterJoin.AND, true));
you can do it with filter query
q=*:*&fq=-id:*
A note added here, to make the field searchable first, it needs the field type in SOLR schema set to "indexed = true". Then you can use "field_name:*" for string type and "field_name:[* TO *]" for numeric type.
I'm trying to figure out how to execute a custom query with Castle ActiveRecord.
I was able to run simple query that returns my entity, but what I really need is the query like that below (with custom field set):
select count(1) as cnt, data from workstationevent where serverdatetime >= :minDate and serverdatetime < :maxDate and userId = 1 group by data having count(1) > :threshold
Thanks!
In this case what you want is HqlBasedQuery. Your query will be a projection, so what you'll get back will be an ArrayList of tuples containing the results (the content of each element of the ArrayList will depend on the query, but for more than one value will be object[]).
HqlBasedQuery query = new HqlBasedQuery(typeof(WorkStationEvent),
"select count(1) as cnt, data from workstationevent where
serverdatetime >= :minDate and serverdatetime < :maxDate
and userId = 1 group by data having count(1) > :threshold");
var results =
(ArrayList)ActiveRecordMediator.ExecuteQuery(query);
foreach(object[] tuple in results)
{
int count = (int)tuple[0]; // = cnt
string data = (string)tuple[1]; // = data (assuming this is a string)
// do something here with these results
}
You can create an anonymous type to hold the results in a more meaningful fashion. For example:
var results = from summary in
(ArrayList)ActiveRecordMediator.ExecuteQuery(query)
select new {
Count = (int)summary[0], Data = (string)summary[1]
};
Now results will contain a collection of anonymous types with properties Count and Data. Or indeed you could create your own summary type and populate it out this way too.
ActiveRecord also has the ProjectionQuery which does much the same thing but can only return actual mapped properties rather than aggregates or functions as you can with HQL.
Be aware though, if you're using ActiveRecord 1.0.3 (RC3) as I was, this will result in a runtime InvalidCastException. ActiveRecordMediator.ExecuteQuery returns an ArrayList and not a generic ICollection. So in order to make it work, just change this line:
var results = (ICollection<object[]>) ActiveRecordMediator.ExecuteQuery(query);
to
var results = (ArrayList) ActiveRecordMediator.ExecuteQuery(query);
and it should work.
Also note that using count(1) in your hql statement will make the query return an ArrayList of String instead of an ArrayList of object[] (which is what you get when using count(*).)
Just thought I'd point this out for the sake of having it all documented in one place.