How to get database field values from extbase action? - database

now that I managed to get random AJAX output, I want to get some useful values from the database as the next step.
Once again, my AJAX call looks like this (additionally, I added a JSON call, which would be even better).
$.ajax({
url: "index.php",
data: "tx_myext_myplugin1[controller]=Mycontroller1&tx_myext_myplugin1[action]=ajax&type=89657201",
success: function(result) {
alert(result);
}
});
/*
var uri = '<f:uri.action action="ajax" controller="Mycontroller1" pageType="89657201" />';
jQuery.getJSON(uri, function(result) {
alert(result.c);
});
*/
my ajaxAction function:
public function ajaxAction() {
$arr = array ('a'=>1,'b'=>2,'c'=>3,'d'=>4,'e'=>5);
return json_encode($arr);
}
This works when I use the JSON call, now I need to get an array with database values though. I thought calling the repository with a findAll() function would already help, but it's not an array I think, which is why I can't use it. A different idea would be to use the getValue methods I wrote in the Model, but I'm not sure if this would help.

Disclaimer: Generally using findAll() method can be real performance killer therefore try to write custom finders, selecting only required properties, especcialy if your model is big or contains many relations!
You are close enough, as you can send findAll() result with json_encode(), but be careful, depending on your model, json created from findAll can be really huge. It's better idea to iterate results and rewrite to new array only required values.
$dataFromRepo = $this->yourRepository->findAll();
$resultArray = array();
foreach ($dataFromRepo as $object){
$resultArray[$object->getUid()] = $object->getTitle();
}
return json_encode($resultArray);
in result you'll get basic JSON object:
{
"1": "Title of first item",
"2": "Second item",
"3": "Et cetera"
}
When you'll remove custom index from $resultArray
foreach ($dataFromRepo as $object){
$resultArray[] = $object->getTitle();
}
you will get JSON array
[
"Title of first item",
"Second item",
"Et cetera"
]
And so on. Of course you can also build this way multidimensional array and send more sophisticated objects to get all you need at once.
P.S. Try always to use for an example JsonLint - online validator to validate if the output you're expecting is valid.

Related

Extracting Arrays as values in a JSON file using AngularJS

This is sort of a three part question. I have a JSON file. A few of the values in the JSON file are arrays. Keeping that in mind:
1) On any given page, I'd only want one set of values coming out of the JSON file. For example (as you'll see in code below) my JSON file is a list of attorneys. On any given bio page, I'd obviously only want one attorney's information. I'm currently, successfully, doing this by pulling back the entire JSON and then using ng-show. But this is causing some other issues that I'll explain in later points, so I'm wondering if there's something to put in the app.factory itself to only bring back the one set in the first place.
2) As mentioned, some of the values are arrays. This comes into play two ways in this situation. One of the ways is that there is an array of quotes about the attorney that I'll need to drop into a JS array so that my JS function can loop through them. Currently, I'm hardcoding the quotes for the one test attorney but I'm really trying to figure out how to make this dynamic. This is one reason I'm trying to figure out how to bring back only one attorney's information so I can then, somehow, say his quotes go into this array.
3) Another array value is a list of his specialty areas. I have another, hardcoded, JS object, associating the short terms with the display names. I realized though, that this has two issues.
a) The JS renders after the Angular, so I can't reference that JS in the Angular code
b) I have no way , anyway, to display the JS dynamically inside the Angular code.
My solution to that aspect was to create a second JSON file holding the area hash but besides being a little cumbersome, I'm also not sure how to dynamically display just the ones I want. e.g: If my attorney only specializes in securities and litigation, how would I tell the code to only display {{areas.securities}} and {{areas.litigation}}? So,I'm open to thoughts there as well.
Here is the current, relevant code. If you need more, just ask.
Thanks.
attorneys.json (irrelevant lines removed)
{"attorneys":
[
{
"id":1,
"name":"Bob Smith",
"quotes":
[
{
"id": 1,
"quote": "Wonderful guy!",
"person": "Dovie"
},
{
"id": 2,
"quote": "If ye be wanting a haggis like no other, Bob be yer man!",
"person": "Angus McLoed"
},
{
"id": 3,
"quote": "Wotta Hottie!",
"person": "Bob's wife"
}
],
"areas": ["altdispute", "litigation", "securities"],
}
]
}
...and the relevant current JS object that I'm not sure what to do with:
var practiceareas = {
altdispute: "Alternative Dispute Resolution",
businesscorp: "Businesses & Corporations",
estateplanning: "Estate Planning",
futures: "Futures & Derivatives",
litigation: "Litigation",
productliability: "Product Liability",
realestate: "Real Estate",
securities: "Securities"
}
script.js (relevant function)
var idno = 0;
/* This is what I want replaced by the Angular pull */
var quotelist = ["\"Wonderful guy!\"<br/>-Dovie", "\"If ye be wanting a haggis like no other, Bob be yer man!\"<br/>-Angus McLoed", "\"Hubba, Hubba! What a hottie!\"<br/>-Bob's wife"];
$("#bio_quotes").html(quotelist[0]);
function quoteflip(id, total){
var src1 = quotelist[idno];
$("#bio_quotes").fadeOut(500, function(){
$("#bio_quotes").html(src1).fadeIn(500);
});
idno = (id + 1) % total;
window.setTimeout(function(){quoteflip(idno, quotelist.length);}, 5000);
}
window.setTimeout(function(){quoteflip(idno, quotelist.length);}, 500);
By the way, as far as the quotes, I'm even happy to turn the JSON into a more condensed version by removing the id and consolidating the quote and author - making it an array of strings instead of mini-objects - if that makes it easier. In fact, it might be easier as far as the function anyway.
Can definitely filter things out at the service / factory using Array.filter. If you want to filter it server side, you have to have the code at server side that will do that.
Not sure what your backend store is but definitely doable.
Again, you can do this pretty easily with Array.map which let you pull specific values into a new Array. If you just want the name and quotes' quote and person name, you can definitely do this using Array .filter and .map and bind the new array to your viewmodel / scope.
Hmm.. again, I'd disagree, this look like the same issue with JavaScript array manipulation. You can definitely as part of the transformation in point 1 and 2, include this so it will transfer area to the long practice area names. The easiest way to show the relevant practice area is to map it to the long name during the transformation in the service layer.
//get matching attorney from the store by id
var matches = data.attorneys.filter(function(a) {
return a.id === id;
});
//If match found,
if (matches.length === 1) {
var result = matches[0];
//map the long name for practicing area
//use the matching attorney's area name as key
//and overwrite the result areas with the map
result.areas = result.areas.map(function(a) {
return practiceareas[a];
});
return result;
}
See this solution: http://embed.plnkr.co/xBPju7/preview
As for the fade in and fade out, I'll let you figure it out...

Angular Resource - Default Model Structure

So I'm using this Rest API with ngResource to do get, query, post and update requests. What I'm looking for, is a way to define the structure for each entity.
For example, assuming we have:
module.factory('app.entity.item', function($resource) {
return $resource('http://xmpl.io/items/:itemId', { itemId: '#id' });
});
I want to instantiate it in a controller like:
module.controller('AddItemCtrl', ['app.entity.item', function(Item) {
$scope.item = new Item();
});
and bind it to the respective form in my template.
The actual problem that I have run into, is that I have to deal with 1:m tables.
An example of the entity structure would be:
{
"name": "",
"categories": [],
"list": [
{
"value": "",
"list": [
{
"value": "",
"list": [
{
"value": ""
}
]
}
]
}
]
}
(A more thorough example in the fiddle below)
Now the first two fields are obviously not the problem. It is the third one. The list. Each one of these lists can have a variable number of items.
I am currently using ngRepeat and an add(type, context) method, which adds a new set of fields to the scope (value field in this example and child lists for the first two levels), which will appear in UI by ngRepeat so the user can fill it up and submit it to the service.
First off, I have to define the structure, so the UI would not be empty when the page loads.
module.controller('AddItemCtrl', ['app.entity.item', function(Item) {
$scope.item = new Item({
"name": "",
"categories": [],
"list": [
{
"value": "",
"list": [
{
"value": "",
"list": [
{
"value": ""
}
]
}
]
}
]
});
});
But that is redundant. I have to do it everywhere!
Another issue is that when the item.$save is called, the model is emptied (perhaps re-instantiated?) and the fields inside the list property (managed by the ngRepeat directive) are gone.
So I'm wondering, what would you do under such circumstances.
Is there a way to define the entity (resource) structure?
SAMPLE: http://jsfiddle.net/g15sqd5s/3/
trying to give simple answer - for simple structures I would use something like
module.factory('Item', function($resource) {
var resource = $resource('http://xmpl.io/items/:itemId', { itemId: '#id' },
// you can also define transformRequest here:
{ transformRequest: function(data) {
// data can be transformed here
return angular.toJson(data);
}});
return angular.extend(resource.prototype,
{
name: null,
categories: []
});
});
but then be aware of need to 'flatten' the object.
and for the more complex model I would check restangular
similar topic is also discussed here:
How can I extend the constructor of an AngularJS resource ($resource)?
I would go ahead and revise my model structure in the backend in the first place - the models on the client side should merely follow the ones already defined, rather than being re-defined in a transform block. So, to answer your question, the "default" model structure comes from the server. What you get in your $resource objects has the structure of what your server returns.
To start off, is it really ok to invoke $save on the Item model when the user has populated some values? What we want to save are obviously the lists associated with an item, not the item itself. A separate resource defined in the backend, say items/<item_id>/list, may be a cleaner solution. It may not scale very well, as you'll have to make a separate GET request for each item to fetch its list, but that's the proper RESTful way to do it.
Extending this approach to the example in your fiddle, I imagine a routing scheme like buildings/<building_id>/floors/<floor_id>/units/<unit_id> would be a proper solution. Making a GET request to buildings/ should yield you a list of buildings; each building in the array returned should be an instance of a Building model, which has the proper URL set so the user can perform a single POST and update only the building name, instead of sending back the whole structure back to the server. Applying this recursively to the nested resources should give you a clean and concise way to deal with model changes.
Regarding the UI part - I would go ahead and define three directives for buildings, floors and units, and let each one manage an array with the respective resources, also taking care for the UI bindings to the model values.
So how could a Building model look like?
var BuildingResource = $resource('/buildings/:id', { id: '#id' });
Invoking BuildingResource.query() should yield an array of existing buildings. Adding a new building could look like this:
var newBuilding = new BuildingResource();
newBuilding.$save().then(function(building) {
$scope.buildings.push(building);
}, function(errData) {
//Handle error here...
});
It should be easy to extend this pattern for the rest of the resources - note that what the server needs to return for every building is just the name and the id; knowing the id is sufficient to construct an URL (and a $resource object, respectively) to fetch the needed child resources (in this case, floors).

convert string in given format to knockout observable array

I have the following string comming from server (as part of object):
...
SelectValues: "[{displayName: "Not selected", id: 0},{displayName: "Client", id: 1},{displayName: "Industry", id: 2},{displayName: "Country", id: 3}]"
...
I am using mapping pluging:
var ItemModel = function (data) {
var self = this;
ko.mapping.fromJS(data, {}, self);
}
As a result all items are created properly, except SelectValues. SelectValues should be observable array (each array item should have two properties id & displayName). Later I will use SelectValues for dropdown.
The problem is that it is returned as String and not as Array.
The question is whether I can somehow deal with it on client side (without changing format on server side)?
I probably can create SelectValuesComputed as ko.computed and somehow convert SelectValues to array (how?).
First of all, this is invalid JSON string you have in your property, see documentation (property names should be in quotes). But, having the condition that you cannot change the server code, you can use eval function to get your object and then use it in mapping like this:
var ItemModel = function (data) {
var self = this;
var mapping = {
"SelectValues": {
create: function(options){
return ko.mapping.fromJS(eval(options.data));
}
}
};
ko.mapping.fromJS(data, mapping, self);
}
See working demo. Although this might seem like the simpliest way to workaround the problem, I would strongly recommend you though to get a valid JSON string instead of using eval (or regexp) to get your object.

Object-oriented models and backbone.js

Suppose I'm working with an API which returns JSON data, but which has a complex or variable structure. For example, a string-valued property may be a plain literal, or may be tagged with a language:
/* first pattern */
{ "id": 1,
"label": "a foo"
}
/* second pattern */
{ "id": 2,
"label": [ {"value": "a foo", "lang": "en"},
{"value": "un foo", "lang": "fr"}]
}
In my client-side code, I don't want to have view code worrying about whether a label is available in multiple-languages, and which one to pick, etc. Or I might want to hide the detailed JSON structure for other reasons. So, I might wrap the JSON value in an object with a suitable API:
/** Value object for foo instances sent from server */
var Foo = function( json ) {
this.json = json;
};
/** Return a suitable label for this foo object */
Foo.prototype.label = function() {
var i18n = ... ;
if (i18n.prefLang && _.isArray(this.json.label)) // ... etc etc
};
So this is all pretty normal value-object pattern, and it's helpful because it's more decoupled from the specific JSON structure, more testable, etc. OK good.
What I currently don't see a way around is how to use one of these value objects with Backbone and Marionette. Specifically, I'd like to use a Foo object as the basis for a Backbone Model, and bind it to a Marionette ItemView. However, as far as I can see, the values in a Model are taken directly from the JSON structure - I can't see a way to recognise that the objects are functions:
var modelFoo = new Backbone.Model( foo );
> undefined
modelFoo.get( "label" ).constructor
> function Function() { [native code] }
So my question is: what is a good way to decouple the attributes of a Backbone Model from the specifics of a given JSON structure, such as a complex API value? Can value objects, models and views be made to play nice?
Edit
Let me add one more example, as I think the example above focussing on i18n issues only conveys part of my concern. Simplifying somewhat, in my domain, I have waterbodies comprising rivers, lakes and inter-tidal zones. A waterbody has associated with it one or more sampling points, and each sampling point has a latest sample. This might come back from the data API on the server as something like:
{"id": "GB12345678",
"centre": {"lat": 1.2345, "long": "-2.3456"},
"type": "river",
"samplingPoints": [{"id": "sp98765",
"latestSample": {"date": "20130807",
"classification": "normal"}
}]
}
So in my view code, I could write expressions such as:
<%= waterbody.samplingPoints[0].latestSample.classification %>
or
<% if (waterbody.type === "river") { %>
but that would be horrible, and easily broken if the API format changes. Slightly better, I could abstract such manipulations out into template helper functions, but they are still hard to write tests for. What I'd like to do is have a value object class Waterbody, so that my view code can have something like:
<%= waterbody.latestClassification() %>
One of the main problems I'm finding with Marionette is the insistence on calling toJSON() on the models passed to views, but perhaps some of the computed property suggestions have a way of getting around that.
The cleanest solution IMO is to put the label accessor into the model instead of the VO:
var FooModel = Backbone.Model.extend({
getLabel : function(){
return this.getLocalized("label");
},
getLocalized : function(key){
//return correct value from "label" array
}
});
and let the views use FooModel#getLabel instead of FooModel#get("label")
--EDIT 1
This lib seems interesting for your use case as well: Backbone.Schema
It allows you to formally declare the type of your model's attributes, but also provides some syntax sugar for localized strings and allows you to create dynamic attributes (called 'computed properties'), composed from the values of other attributes.
--EDIT 2 (in response to the edited question)
IMO the VO returned from the server should be wrapped inside a model and this model is passed to the view. The model implements latestClassification, not the VO, this allows the view to directly call that method on the model.
A simple approach to this (possibly to simple for your implementation) would be to override the model's parse method to return suitable attributes:
var modelFoo = Backbone.Model.extend({
parse: function ( json ) {
var i18n = ... ;
if (i18n.prefLang && _.isArray(json.label)) {
// json.label = "complex structure"
}
return json;
}
});
That way only your model worries about how the data from the server is formatted without adding another layer of abstraction.

mongodb - retrieve array subset

what seemed a simple task, came to be a challenge for me.
I have the following mongodb structure:
{
(...)
"services": {
"TCP80": {
"data": [{
"status": 1,
"delay": 3.87,
"ts": 1308056460
},{
"status": 1,
"delay": 2.83,
"ts": 1308058080
},{
"status": 1,
"delay": 5.77,
"ts": 1308060720
}]
}
}}
Now, the following query returns whole document:
{ 'services.TCP80.data.ts':{$gt:1308067020} }
I wonder - is it possible for me to receive only those "data" array entries matching $gt criteria (kind of shrinked doc)?
I was considering MapReduce, but could not locate even a single example on how to pass external arguments (timestamp) to Map() function. (This feature was added in 1.1.4 https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/SERVER-401)
Also, there's always an alternative to write storedJs function, but since we speak of large quantities of data, db-locks can't be tolerated here.
Most likely I'll have to redesign the structure to something 1-level deep, like:
{
status:1,delay:3.87,ts:138056460,service:TCP80
},{
status:1,delay:2.83,ts:1308058080,service:TCP80
},{
status:1,delay:5.77,ts:1308060720,service:TCP80
}
but DB will grow dramatically, since "service" is only one of many options which will append each document.
please advice!
thanks in advance
In version 2.1 with the aggregation framework you are now able to do this:
1: db.test.aggregate(
2: {$match : {}},
3: {$unwind: "$services.TCP80.data"},
4: {$match: {"services.TCP80.data.ts": {$gte: 1308060720}}}
5: );
You can use a custom criteria in line 2 to filter the parent documents. If you don't want to filter them, just leave line 2 out.
This is not currently supported. By default you will always receive the whole document/array unless you use field restrictions or the $slice operator. Currently these tools do not allow filtering the array elements based on the search criteria.
You should watch this request for a way to do this: https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/SERVER-828
I'm attempting to do something similar. I tried your suggestion of using the GROUP function, but I couldn't keep the embedded documents separate or was doing something incorrectly.
I needed to pull/get a subset of embedded documents by ID. Here's how I did it using Map/Reduce:
db.parent.mapReduce(
function(parent_id, child_ids){
if(this._id == parent_id)
emit(this._id, {children: this.children, ids: child_ids})
},
function(key, values){
var toReturn = [];
values[0].children.forEach(function(child){
if(values[0].ids.indexOf(product._id.toString()) != -1)
toReturn.push(child);
});
return {children: toReturn};
},
{
mapparams: [
"4d93b112c68c993eae000001", //example parent id
["4d97963ec68c99528d000007", "4debbfd5c68c991bba000014"] //example embedded children ids
]
}
).find()
I've abstracted my collection name to 'parent' and it's embedded documents to 'children'. I pass in two parameters: The parent document ID and an array of the embedded document IDs that I want to retrieve from the parent. Those parameters are passed in as the third parameter to the mapReduce function.
In the map function I find the parent document in the collection (which I'm pretty sure uses the _id index) and emit its id and children to the reduce function.
In the reduce function, I take the passed in document and loop through each of the children, collecting the ones with the desired ID. Looping through all the children is not ideal, but I don't know of another way to find by ID on an embedded document.
I also assume in the reduce function that there is only one document emitted since I'm searching by ID. If you expect more than one parent_id to match, than you will have to loop through the values array in the reduce function.
I hope this helps someone out there, as I googled everywhere with no results. Hopefully we'll see a built in feature soon from MongoDB, but until then I have to use this.
Fadi, as for "keeping embedded documents separate" - group should handle this with no issues
function getServiceData(collection, criteria) {
var res=db[collection].group({
cond: criteria,
initial: {vals:[],globalVar:0},
reduce: function(doc, out) {
if (out.globalVar%2==0)
out.vals.push({doc.whatever.kind.and.depth);
out.globalVar++;
},
finalize: function(out) {
if (vals.length==0)
out.vals='sorry, no data';
return out.vals;
}
});
return res[0];
};

Resources