I have a store with a list of user entries. Each time a user is added, I want to add all entries of that user to the store without removing the old ones.
I have a JSON web service that returns all entries of a user to me.
I read the docs http://docs.sencha.com/extjs/4.2.2/#!/api/Ext.data.Store-method-load
and if I understand correctly, I should be able to do sth like:
myStore.proxy.extraParams.searchname = userName;
myStore.load({addRecords: true});
But in my json store, the previously added records are still removed from the store. Why?
Damn, I can't downvote my own post.
Evan's comment led to me putting some 50 lines of console.log() into the code.
Result: I was deleting all the records from the store before I did the partial refresh - not just those I wanted to reload.
Related
I have the following workflow on a website:
Some user John Doe declares a company through form 1
(fields: name, head office location)
After John Doe submits (HTTP POST) form 1, he is redirected (HTTP 302) to company form 2 with additional legal information about the company.
The problem is, if John Doe hits the back button of his browser during step 2, he will land on the form 1, with data filled by the browser (using values he already submitted — that's what Firefox and major browsers seem to do).
John Doe might then think he can use this form to update some information (e.g. fix a typo in the name of the company) whereas he will actually create a new company doing so, as we don't know on the server side whether he wants to declare a new company or update the one he just created.
Do you know any simple solution to handle that problem ?
Use javascript/jquery script after the page is loaded to empty all the inputs. This will prevent confusion of "updating the company".
jQuery would look something like this:
$('#elementID').val('');
You can also handle the situation by manipulating the browser history
on load of form 2, and pass the CompanyId generated on submit of form 1 using querystring. So that you can actually update the company as the user
Suppose John submits form1.html, a unique CompanyId "1001" is generated and redirected to form2.html. Now on load of form2 you can modify the browser history form1.html?companyid=1001 using
var stateObj = { foo: "bar" };
history.pushState(stateObj, "page 1", "form1.html?companyid=1001");
Now, when the user click back button and submits the form1 again. you can check for companyid in querystring and update the company.
I think it is more user-friendly when user can return back to previous form and update it (instead preventing the described behavior).
I use in most cases similar way to handle described problem:
Let's assume that user is on the page /some-page, that contains "Create new company" button.
When the user opens this page, will be executed special method createOrFindCompanyDraft() on the server-side. This method creates new company "draft" record in DB (only for the current user). For example, draft record has primary key id=473. When you execute this method again it will return the same record with the id=473 (with "draft" status). "Draft" record should't display on any other interfaces.
And "Create new company" has link /company/common/473.
When user go to /company/common/473, you display form 1, that will be filled from "draft" record. At first time user will see empty form.
Technically user will update the existing record, but you can display "Create new company" title on the page.
Then user go to form 2, for example, /company/legal-info/473, you create similar draft record for the this form (similar to step 1).
When user submit the form 2, you will remove "draft" status from the record id=473 (and any related records).
Next time when user open page /some-page, will be created new draft record for the current user.
Browser history will contain:
/some-page
/company/common/473
/company/legal-info/473
/some-page2
I like this approach, because all form only update records. You can go to previous/next form many times (for example "Back"/"Forward" browser buttons). You can close browser, and open not completed forms tomorrow. This way doesn't require any additional manipulation with the browser history.
try this
<form autocomplete="off" ...></form>
And Another
Use temporary tables or session to store the Page 1 form data. If the page 2 form is submitted use the temporary data of page 1 which is stored in database or in session.
Use a Separate key (Hidden field ) in both page 1 and page 2.
Actually I thought of a trick to obtain that "create on first post, update after" behavior (just like the user thinks it should behave).
Let's say the step 1 form is at the URL /create_company/. Then I could have that page generate a random code XXX and redirect to /create_company/?token=XXX. When I create the company I save the information that it was created through page with token XXX (for instance, I save it in user's session as we don't need to keep that information forever) and when the form is submitted, if I know that a company was already generated using this token, I know the user used the same form instance and must have used the back button since the token would be different if he explicitly asked for another company.
What do you think ? (I initially thought there should be a simpler solution, as this seems a little bit over-engineered for such a simple issue)
This is more like a UX question.
I'd think that the solution lies within the information given to the user on that form, to help them understand what they're doing.
Set a title that says 'Create a company', for example, and set your submit button as 'Create Company' will help your user with that. Use a unique id when you create the company object, and pass the id back to the same URL in order to perform an update. You should then update your title and button that tells user that they are updating instead of creating.
In that sense I'd say it's better to use a more generic URL like /company and /company?id=12345.
You could also consider using Restful API protocol to help your server identifies the CRUD operation. http://www.restapitutorial.com/lessons/httpmethods.html
Without the "routing" part of django it is hard to help. I can just answer my experience from the express.js-router functionality:
you can specify a post on /company, which is for new users.
you can specify another route for post on /company/:companyid for a changing form
and as a response from the create-post you can redirect to the different location.
We are struggling to mine all time records for this year via API.
We have tried to include the :dont_limit_result GET variable and set it to 1, however it did not help us.
The version that we use is ACTIVE COLLAB 5.11.0, the URL we are hitting: projects?dont_limit_result=1&page=$page
Please give me some advise on how to proceed.
Most of API responses are paginated, and pagination can't be turned off using a GET switch. Instead, you should check following headers:
X-Angie-PaginationCurrentPage - indicates current page
X-Angie-PaginationItemsPerPage - indicates number of items per page
X-Angie-PaginationTotalItems - indicates number of items in the entire data set.
and walk through pages until you reach the end of data set.
Another option is to give project's filter a try. Here's an example request that will return all projects:
curl -H "X-Angie-AuthApiToken: YOUR-API-TOKEN" "http://your.activecollab.com/api/v1/reports/run?type=ProjectsFilter"
This one will return all active projects:
curl -H "X-Angie-AuthApiToken: YOUR-API-TOKEN" "http://your.activecollab.com/api/v1/reports/run?type=ProjectsFilter&completed_on_filter=is_not_set"
I'm using the php API wrapper 3.0 - how do i get the headers back to know there are more pages and then what is the correct form of the query to get further pages?
For example my basic query is:
$timeRecords = $client->get('projects/22/time-records')->getJson();
to get time records - but this only returns 100 and there are more!
Thanks,
P
here is the problem I'm stuck with:
I'm using Rails 4 & MySQL
I've Message which have one sender and one recipient.
I want to be able to archive messages but if sender archive a message, the recipient still can access to the message until he archive it too.
I've serialize a field :
serialize :archived_by, Array
which contains which user archived the message
but I can't figure out how to query with it.
Message.where("archived_by like ?", [1].to_yaml)
works well, returning messages archived by User '1'
Message.where.not("archived_by like ?", [1].to_yaml)
won't work, returning nothing
I would like to find something else than using a classic many to many ...
Thanks!
UPDATE
I finally decided to add 2 fields, one for the sender & one for the recipient to know which archived the message. If someone has the proper way to do this, tell us :)
If you are using postgresql you could query the informations.
As in answer Searching serialized data, using active record described, the downsize of serializer at least under mysql is, that you byepass native db abstraction.
I am working with a script to pull the response ID from a form submission so that when users edit their response, I can match the edit to the initial response. My script creates a .pdf of the contents of each form submitted, but when users edit responses, it creates a new form containing only the edited data, without linking it to the initial response.
The edit response contains a timestamp and the edited information, and the timestamp is used with Response.getId(timestamp), iirc, and returns the ID of the form submission. However, I am sometimes getting a very strange return, and I don't know where it comes from. The response is much shorter than a typical response ID (10-12 alphanumeric instead of 30+). I will try to comeback and edit this question with the code, but I'm on a different log in at the moment, so I'll have to swap over and copy code and come back. Running unit tests hasn't really helped, as I get the expected result most of the time. It's just an occasional hiccup, but I have to find where the incorrect information is coming from.
function getResponseId(timestamp){
var form = FormApp.openById('<formID>');
if(typeof(timestamp) != 'number'){
timestamp = new Date(timestamp);
}
var responses = form.getResponses(timestamp);
var entryId = responses[0].getId();
return entryId;
}
That's is. I suppose the if(typeof... may be throwing things off if it's passing in a Date string instead of the actual timestamp of entry, but I don't think so. I'll double check it and debug it in the meantime, and if I answer my own question, I'll come back and fix it.
Hmm. Sounds like the same behavior. What I decided to do instead was to match the timestamps that are recorded, but you have to grab the stamps in the 3rd line of code, as the old stamp is overwritten quickly. I just subtracted oldTime from newTime, left a 5 sec window to match them, and that worked. I just haven't had a chance to post it yet, as I just got it working for new submissions, edits, and failed writes about an hour ago.
I currently have a database setup within an html page and my requirement is to update a single row within the application.
I could refresh the database with "fresh" data, but that would require too much time.
I had a look at
dbSports().update("aName", object.aname);
However it seems to update all the records in my database instead of just one. Are there any answers to this particular issue?
The Documentation on the matter is missing a major chunk of information, but is covered in a presentation done by the author of the library (http://www.slideshare.net/typicaljoe/better-data-management-using-taffydb-1357773) [Slide 30]
The querying object needs to be pointing to the object you want to update and editing happening from there. i.e.
var obj = dbObject({
Id : value.id
}).update(function() {
this.aName = object.aname;
return this;
});
Where the object in the query points to the ID of the row and the update function then points to it aswell and the callback updates the value that the application needs to update
you first have to find the matching record, then update it
yourDB({"ID":recordID}).update({
"col1":val1,
"col2":val2,
"col3":val3
});