Is it capable to implement feature of procedure on getting structured response from two tables
I have two tables: 'Company' and 'Phone'
Company contains companies and Phone contains phone numbers on each company.
One company --> many phones related by companyID
I need exactly this structure:
{
"resource": [
{
"companyId": 1,
"companyName": "Apple",
"companySubject": "Security",
"phones": [
{
"name": "tel1",
"phone": "+178548555"
}
]
},
{
"companyId": 2,
"companyName": "Samsung",
"companySubject": "IT",
"phones": [
{
"name": "tel1",
"phone": "+178548555"
},
{
"name": "tel2",
"phone": "+178548555"
},
{
"name": "tel3",
"phone": "+178548555"
}
]
},
{
"companyId": 3,
"companyName": "LG",
"companySubject": "Accounting",
"phones": [
{
"name": "tel1",
"phone": "+178548555"
},
{
"name": "tel2",
"phone": "+178548555"
}
]
}
]
}
Problem is that they are in separate tables and I cant figure out how to implement it.
I use dreamfactory for backend
If the tables have a foreign key relationship (defined in the database) then you can simply fetch the phones by calling GET {service_name}/_table/{table_name}?related={relationship_name}
In your example above this might be something like GET my_service/_table/Company?related=phones_by_companyId
You can get the relationship name by looking at the table structure information in the DreamFactory Schema tab, and you can even create an alias for this relationship so that the relationship name would just be phones. Working with related data
If the tables are not related you can use DreamFactory's virtual foreign keys to relate them. More info about VFK's can be found on the wiki
Related
Actually i am pushing data to other system but before pushing i have to change the "key" in the whole JSON. JSON may contain 200 or 10000 or 250000 data.
sample JSON:
{
"insert": "table",
"contacts": [
{
"testName": "testname",
"ContactID": 212121
},
{
"testName": "testname",
"ContactID": 2146354564
},
{
"testName": "testname",
"ContactID": 12312
},
{
"testName": "testname",
"ContactID": 211221
},
{
"testName": "testname",
"ContactID": 10218550
}
]
}
I need to change contacts array Keys. These contacts may be in bulk. So i need to work with this efficiently with minimal complexity.
The above JSON to be converted as below
{
"insert": "table",
"contacts": [
{
"name": "testname",
"phone": 212121
},
{
"name": "testname",
"phone": 2146354564
},
{
"name": "testname",
"phone": 12312
},
{
"name": "testname",
"phone": 211221
},
{
"name": "testname",
"phone": 10218550
}
]
}
here is my code trying by loop
ini_dict = request.data
contact_data = ini_dict['contacts']
for i in contact_data:
i['name'] = i.pop('testName')
print(contact_data)
Please suggest me how can i change the key names efficiently for bulk data. i mean for 50000 lists in contacts. "for loop" will be leading a performance issue. So please let me know the efficient way to achieve this
I dont know how fast you need it to be nor how you are choosing to store your json. One simple solution is just store it as a string and then replace all the instances of your attributes.
# Something like this using a jsonstring
jsonstring.replace("'testName':", "'name':")
jsonstring.replace("'ContactId':", "'phone':")
If you want to do this in bulk you, may need to create some batch process to be able to fetch multiple existing records and make changes at once. I have done this before with the java equivalent of https://pypi.org/project/JayDeBeApi/ but, that was more for modifying existing records in a database.
There is an items node in the specifications which says it is for an array of items, like paging items, youtube video list
What if I have GET request on a single item, how should the response be formatted ?
Just to one item in the array?
items:[item]
https://google.github.io/styleguide/jsoncstyleguide.xml
I don't think #tanmay_vijay's answer is correct or nuanced enough as it seems that single item responses are in arrays in the YouTube example in the docs.
{
"apiVersion": "2.0",
"data": {
"updated": "2010-02-04T19:29:54.001Z",
"totalItems": 6741,
"startIndex": 1,
"itemsPerPage": 1,
"items": [
{
"id": "BGODurRfVv4",
"uploaded": "2009-11-17T20:10:06.000Z",
"updated": "2010-02-04T06:25:57.000Z",
"uploader": "docchat",
"category": "Animals",
"title": "From service dog to SURFice dog",
"description": "Surf dog Ricochets inspirational video ...",
"tags": [
"Surf dog",
"dog surfing",
"dog",
"golden retriever",
],
"thumbnail": {
"default": "https://i.ytimg.com/vi/BGODurRfVv4/default.jpg",
"hqDefault": "https://i.ytimg.com/vi/BGODurRfVv4/hqdefault.jpg"
},
"player": {
"default": "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGODurRfVv4&feature=youtube_gdata",
"mobile": "https://m.youtube.com/details?v=BGODurRfVv4"
},
"content": {
"1": "rtsp://v5.cache6.c.youtube.com/CiILENy73wIaGQn-Vl-0uoNjBBMYDSANFEgGUgZ2aWRlb3MM/0/0/0/video.3gp",
"5": "https://www.youtube.com/v/BGODurRfVv4?f=videos&app=youtube_gdata",
"6": "rtsp://v7.cache7.c.youtube.com/CiILENy73wIaGQn-Vl-0uoNjBBMYESARFEgGUgZ2aWRlb3MM/0/0/0/video.3gp"
},
"duration": 315,
"rating": 4.96,
"ratingCount": 2043,
"viewCount": 1781691,
"favoriteCount": 3363,
"commentCount": 1007,
"commentsAllowed": true
}
]
}
}
It could however be that it depends on the resource being targeted from the request. This is the way it is in the competing JSONAPI standard.
From JSONAPI standard:
A logical collection of resources MUST be represented as an array, even if it only contains one item or is empty.
You don't need to have items field for showing single item. If you're sure your API is always going to return single object, you can return it as data itself.
{
"data": {
"kind": "user",
"fields": "author,id",
"id": "bart",
"author": "Bart"
}
}
Fields such as data.kind data.fields data.etag data.id data.lang data.updated data.deleted can still be used here.
Source for snippet docs
When structuring our data model (JSON in a document database), we have users which are part of a project. I.E. a project has many users and a user can be part of many projects.
Does it make sense to store each project a user has access to in the user:
{
"id": "u1"
"name": "John Doe",
"email": "john.doe#domain.com",
"projects": [
"p1",
"p2",
"p3"
]
}
Or instead store the users in the projects themselve:
{
"id": "p1"
"name": "Project A",
"users": [
"u1"
]
}
{
"id": "p2"
"name": "Project B",
"users": [
"u1"
]
}
{
"id": "p3"
"name": "Project C",
"users": [
"u1"
]
}
We anticipate needing to select all projects for a given user as well as selecting all users for a given project.
According to document of Mongo database (https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/tutorial/model-embedded-one-to-many-relationships-between-documents), two ways above is fine.
I think the business will make decision that which data model should be chosen, for e.g, if there were only one or two projects but many users and you only need to show list of projects of users, the first way is better.
P/S: If you use Mongo, please consider to use mongoose which helps to retrieve data easily.
I have a REST Web Services Call that is returning data in the following format:
{
"Id": "0497cee4-45dc-47d8-97a8-b45ad8018775",
"Status": "OK",
"ProviderName": "MyApp",
"DateTimeUTC": "/Date(1508348383277)/",
"Contacts": [
{
"ContactID": "1efa0ea1-de5c-4172-869c-816e27c3c825",
"ContactStatus": "ACTIVE",
"Name": "Company",
"FirstName": "Joe",
"LastName": "Bob",
"EmailAddress": "mainguy#here.com",
"BankAccountDetails": "",
"ContactPersons": [
{
"FirstName": "Operations",
"LastName": "",
"EmailAddress": "there#here.com",
"IncludeInEmails": true
},
{
"FirstName": "Another",
"LastName": "Contact Email",
"EmailAddress": "here#there.com",
"IncludeInEmails": true
}
],
"HasAttachments": false,
}
]
}
Within Microsoft Flow I would like to grab the main contact email (Contacts.EmailAddress) as well as all of the secondary Contacts Emails (Contacts.ContactPersons[x].EmailAddress); and use that for the too field of down-flow email.
ContactPersons will not always be defined in every case, but Contacts.EmailAddress should be.
What is the best way to do this with a flow? Is there a way to concatenate data over a loop or something? I can't seem to find a way to do it.
Try using Data Operations (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/flow/data-operations).
You can start off with a Select, picking the EmailAddress field in the Map, and then redirecting that to a Join and using that output.
I am starting to implement a REST layer to an existing JSF-webapp (using RESTEasy, with a Jettison provider). Since tutorials for Java REST layers are quite basic (simple objects) I am facing the question how existing JPA entity relations can be easily exposed to/consumed from the client. A simple "/user" REST-method already gives me successfully the output below, which is a good start. But my main question is - how to deal with this kind of structures. Is it common to use such structures through REST?
I don't want to expose all details or the whole entity-tree, wether it is because of irrelevance, saving traffic or security issues. Using #XmlTransient works fine for the #Procudes, but merging these entities on a #POST/#PUT all #XmlTransient properties are merged to NULL. What is right way of doing that?
Since #XMLTransient is a global and permanent setting - what is the right approach to dynamically decide which depth of entity-tree I want to expose?
thanks
Example JSON of User-entity:
{
"user": {
"id": ..,
"uuid": "1521ccad69ba4579bbe49e75181fefc1",
"image": "",
"contact": {
"id": ..,
"uuid": "8eb429dcca994834ae5c8cf07cba62a2",
"cellphone": "",
"city": "",
"country": "",
"email": "mail#foo.bar",
"fax": "",
"phone": 555,
...
},
"name": "...",
"account": {
"id": ...,
"uuid": "80b331f9e6644449bb3600b0e5145253",
"confirmed": true,
"profile": {
"id": ...,
"uuid": "e172bdcafe2645d7975852ca5685c98c",
"locale": "en",
"notifyMessage": false,
"notifyNews": true,
"notifyTask": true,
"timeZone": "Europe/Berlin"
},
"roleProfiles": {
"id": ..,
"uuid": "f1713758f3f2416faed3e68350f2d759",
"active": true,
"assemblies": [
{
"id": ..,
"uuid": "13d72449833a4eb0b5b4f62c729ee44f",
"image": "",
"commercialRegisters": [
123,
456
],
"contact": {
"id": ...,
"uuid": "bef3802297344e3c8c3619b6c91c345a",
"city": "",
"country": "",
...
},
"thumbnail": ""
},
{
...
}
],
},
"userName": "..."
},
"displayName": "...",
"firstName": "Foo",
"lastName": "Bar",
"salutation": "",
"title": ""
}
}
Hi references in your Java classes should be serialized to JSON as links and not as values.
This is how Spring REST does it.
The good thing is : That way you have a kind of lazy loading
The bad thing is that the client needs additional requests to get the values of the references.
I developed a complete solution for that, but that was a hard piece of work.
The client (in javascript) creates proxies for those references and resolves them on demand.
I have a demo of that at demo.appdriver.com
In the upper right corner you see a link 'REST API' click it and you can see the REST API of a rather complex domain model.
Now you can start to click on the user interface , create, change, delete etc.
and have a look at the traffic between client and server.
Hope it helps !