I have a file object store by indexing name and library_id like below,
let objectStore = db.createObjectStore('file', { keyPath: 'id' });
tempStore.createIndex('nameLibId', ['attributes.name', 'attributes.library_id'], { unique: false });
The object store contains multiple library id's files. I'd like apply the name sort to the particular library id's files. I tried indexing in the below format but it returns empty data.
let self = this,
db = get(self, 'db'),
transaction = db.transaction(["file"], "readonly"),
objectStore = transaction.objectStore("file"),
index = objectStore.index('nameLibId'),
keyRange = IDBKeyRange.only('library_id')),
req = index.getAll(keyRange);
req.onsuccess = ((e)=>{
console.log(e.target.result); // returns empty array
});
Attached the screenshot of db model for reference.
24536475, abc, created, jhgf and lastmodified file names are belongs to a library id called 123.
Screen Shot..* file names are belongs to an another library id called 234.
I need the files which are sorted by name only the given library id. Any help would be highly appreciated.
If your index is based on a properties array and you want to match something using IDBKeyRange.only, then your parameter to IDBKeyRange.only should also be an array. Right now you are comparing a basic string value against a properties array value, where of course nothing matches. In other words, you cannot query against a two-part array using only one part of it.
Furthermore, the parameter to IDBKeyRange.only isn't a property name, it is a value. You want to specify a value to match in the index's set of keypath values. For example, if your index was based exclusively on attributes.name, then you would want to specify a particular value within that index, such as "abc".
And so, taking into account the above two points, and given that your index is not a single value but is instead an array of two properties, you need to revise your parameter to IDBKeyRange.only to look for an array. Something like IDBKeyRange.only(['abc', 'yoktc....']);.
Now, this is further complicated by the fact that what you are doing in your code does not actually accomplish what you want. Ignoring the sort concern for a moment, you only want to use the id condition, and not the name, when matching rows of this index. So you might be tempted to try IDBKeyRange.only([undefined, 'asdf']). Unfortunately this will not work at all because you cannot specify undefined (you will get a javascript error).
So, you must always query by both values, even though you only want to apply criteria to one of the values. The trick here is that you switch to using a different method than only. You use IDBKeyRange.bound(), and furthermore, you do a trick where you specify a criteria such as "smallest possible number is less than my number and my number is less than largest possible number", e.g. a condition that always is true. You use "smallest possible value" as your lower boundary, and "largest possible value" as your upper boundary.
Here is an example in your case. The smallest possible value of name I think is empty string. The largest possible value of name is probably any non-alphanumeric character, so let's use tilde "~". So, now we would rewrite the range parameter. Instead of using IDBKeyRange.only, we use IDBKeyRange.bound. It looks like the following (roughly):
var libId = ???;
var smallestNameValue = '';
var largestNameValue = '~';
var lowerBound = [smallestNameValue, libId];
var upperBOund = [largestNameValue, libId];
var range = IDBKeyRange.bound(lowerBound, upperBound);
Now, the second part, regarding sorting, and a major caveat of using indices that have multiple parts (not to be confused with the multiPart index property, ugh). And I myself get this backwards all the time, so I might even be wrong here and the above will work. The problem with the above is that one the first criterion is met the second is ignored, because of how the short-circuited array sorting algorithm works in indexedDB's comparison function. Your query is going to match everything, because every index row meets the criteria. So the trick to this is to always query first by the important condition, to basically pay attention to the order in which you specify your conditions. So what that means is that you need to switch the order of the properties you specified when creating the index, so that you can query first by libId and then by name.
Instead of createIndex('nameLibId',['attributes.name','attributes.library_id']); you want to do createIndex('nameLibId',['attributes.library_id', 'attributes.name']);. And this also means you need to swap your lower and upper bound queries, e.g. var lowerBound = [libId, smallestNameValue]; (and don't forget to switch the upper).
As I mentioned in my answer on using compound indices, you can always using indexedDB.cmp to experiment. Right now, open up the console on this web page. In the console, type something like this:
indexedDB.cmp(['', '5'], ['~', '5']);
Take a look at the results.
Some final notes:
Tilde might be the wrong thing to use, sorry but I am not bothering to remember, you could also just try any valid sentinel value, where by sentinel I mean any value you know will always come after all your other valid values
As I point out in my other answer, if either prop is missing in the data the actual object won't match
for cmp, -1 means left is less than right, 0 means left equals right, and 1 means left greater than right
I'm super new to R and have a question on how to do something. I listed the things that i got to work so ppl have an idea on what is going on. the thing im having trouble with is in bold.
-I have a data spreadsheet with 2 columns of data (End and CTCF). With the CTCF column having more cells
-I want to to take one value from the "End" column and subtract that value from each individual value in "CTCF" column (so i would have a bunch of products from each calculation)
-I want to then compare those products and find the miniumn absoulute value and the coresponding spot in the CTCF column
-then place that value into a new column ajacent to the corresponding End value.
I wrote a while loop (i know there is probably a WAY easier method) and got the calulation/comparison thing down. I was even able to output the location of the CTCF cell that contains my value of interest see below:
*
*data2<-read.csv("farah.csv")
head(data2)
periph_ctcfs<-list()
temp<-vector(mode="numeric", length = 356)
count<-1
for(i in 1:length(data2$CTCF)) while (count<357)
{
End<-data2$End[count]
periph_ctcfs<-(End-data2$CTCF)
periph_ctcfs<-abs(periph_ctcfs)
periph_ctcfs<-which.min(periph_ctcfs)
print(periph_ctcfs)
temp[]<-data2$CTCF[periph_ctcfs]
count<-count + 1;
}*
The problem is when im trying to produce the new "periph_ctcfs" column, when im trying to insert it into the "temp" vector, the last printed number gets placed within all the cells of the "temp" vector. It feels like that each time the loop goes through its not inserting the retrieved value into "temp". Can anyone help? Thanks ive included a link to a photo (below) so you can get a visual on the layout of the data. Sorry for being a n00b.
For clarity purposes:
I'm having a strange issue.
I created a model observer for my user model. The model observer is being run at 'saving'. when I dump the object at the very end of the user model to be displayed ( this is just before it saves.. according to laravel docs ) it displays all the attributes set correctly for the object, I've even seen an error that showed the correct attributes as set and being inserted into my database table. However, after the save has been completed and I query the database, two of the fields are not saved into the table.
There is no code written by myself sitting between the point where I dumped the attributes to check that they had been set and the save operation to the database. so I have no idea what could be causing this to happen. All the names are set correctly, and like I said, the attributes show as being inserted into the database, they just never end up being saved, I receive no error messages and only two out of ten attributes aren't being saved.
In my searches I have found many posts detailing that the $fillable property should be set, or issues relating to a problem with variables being misnamed or unset, however because I already have the specific attributes not being saved specified in the $fillable array, on top of the fact that they print out exactly as expected pre save, I don't believe those issues are related to the problem I am experiencing.
to save I'm calling:
User::create(Input::all());
and then the observer that handles the data looks like this:
class UserObserver {
# a common key between the city and state tables, helps to identify correct city
$statefp = State::where('id',$user->state_id)->pluck('statefp');
# trailing zeros is a function that takes the first parameter and adds zeros to make sure
# that in this case for example, the dates will be two characters with a trailing zero,
# based on the number specified in the second parameter
$user->birth_date = $user->year.'-'.$user->trailingZeros( $user->month, 2 ).'-'.$user->trailingZeros( $user->day, 2 );
if(empty($user->city)){
$user->city_id = $user->defaultCity;
}
$user->city_id = City::where( 'statefp', $statefp )->where('name', ucfirst($user->city_id))->pluck('id');
# if the user input zip code is different then suggested zip code then find location data
# on the input zip code input by the user from the geocodes table
if( $user->zip !== $user->defaultZip ){
$latlon = Geocode::where('zip', $user->zip)->first();
$user->latitude = $latlon['latitude'];
$user->longitude = $latlon['longitude'];
}
unset($user->day);
unset($user->month);
unset($user->year);
unset($user->defaultZip);
unset($user->defaultCity);
}
that is the code for the two values that aren't being set, when I run
dd($user);
all the variables are set correctly, and show up in the mysql insert attempt screen with correct values, but they do not persist past that point.. it seems to me that possibly mysql is rejecting the values for the city_id and the birth_date. However, I cannot understand why, or whether it is a problem with Laravel or mysql.
since I was calling
User::create();
I figured I'd try to have my observer listen to:
creating();
I'm not sure why it only effected the date and city variables, but changing the function to listen at creating() instead of saving() seems to have solved my problem.
I've got a really, really odd problem manifesting on a big Rails e-commerce app and thought I'd see if anyone has good insight. I have an"Order" model with many associations. If I create a new instance, and then set one particular column value and "save!" the "save!" is succeeding without errors, but the change isn't actually persisted to the DB. I'll run through the scenario below:
#order = Order.create!(<some attributes>)
=> true
#order.shipping_method_id
=> 1
#order.shipping_method_id = 203
=> 203
#order.save!
=> true
#order.shipping_method_id
=> 1
To try and debug this I actually prepended a before_save filter and I can see that when this first filter is called after setting the value, it is correct ("203") BUT the very next before_save after the 6-or-so built-in "autosave_foo_bar_quux" filters (for nested associations) it is back to "1".
Oddly, if I just reload the order (#order.reload), change the column value and save! the update does succeed.
In both cases, doing #order.changed shows that ActiveModel recognizes the column value change for shipping_method_id. In the first, though, the SQL logging shows that the order row is not updated.
I feel like I'm going insane. Any ideas? Also, let me know if there's anything else I can post here for more context.
#TableGenerator(name="Emp_Gen",table="ID_GEN", pkColumnName = "GEN_NAME",pkColumnValue = "Employee_GEN",valueColumnName = "GEN_VAL",initialValue = 1000,allocationSize = 100)
Every is ok,but initialValue is not effective.
Below is the table named "employee"(Note:MySql,Hibernate-JPA is used)
I think the first row 'id' is 1000,not 1,right?But if it's 1,the second should be 101....
Who can help me a stupid man?
What it comes to the first value being 1 instead of 1001 that is Hibernate bug HHH-4228, with status Won't fix. Correct first value in your case is 1001 instead of 1000, because initialValue initializes column that stores last value returned (and not the next value to be returned).
Using following in persistence.xml (as also suggested in bug report) will fix problem with first value:
<property name="hibernate.id.new_generator_mappings" value="true"/>
Meaning of allocationSize is likely misunderstood in question. It is not step to increment. It means how many values are allocated with one database query from the table. This is rather optimization to avoid additional query every time when id value is needed for new entity.
Side product is that restart of application causes often holes to the sequence:
initialValue = 1000,allocationSize = 100
Use value 1001 (=> value in valueColumn is updated to 1100).
shutdown and start application
next value will be 1101, not 1002.