One of my queries in my web app is not working correctly.
session.query(GroupUserRelationship).filter(GroupUserRelationship.user_id == user.id).all()
and when I print the result, i get
[<DB.models.GroupUserRelationship object at 0x104fd2d90>]
How do I get an actual list of all the columns that match the filter?
all() returns an list of [ objects ] which in your case looks to contain a single GroupUserRelationship.
If you know only a single object should be returned, instead of a list checkout either:
one()
or
first()
Related
I've used this Flow to return the count of any Sharepoint list to Powerapps.
https://masteroffice365.com/get-sharepoint-library-or-list-total-items-from-power-apps/
How would I modify it to return the contents of a list to Powerapps, so that I can use Powerapps to put it into a collection?
Would this mean I don't have to worry about Delegation if the list has more than 2000 items?
This is what I've tried so far.
There is a variable TotalItemsCount which I have changed to ListItems. Instead of using an Integer I set ListItems to an array.
In the Get Library list contents I use this for the URI.
concat( '_api/web/lists/GetbyTitle(''', first( body('Filter_Library_List_Being_Queried') )?['displayName'], ''')/Items' )
I'm not sure what to put in as the last step given that I want it to be able to return the contents of any list. I think this rules out a parse json step as that requires a definite schema.
I've added an ApplyToEach
I'm getting this error message when it runs.
ExpressionEvaluationFailed. The execution of template action
'Apply_to_each' failed: the result of the evaluation of 'foreach'
expression '#body('Get_Library_List_Contents')' is of type 'Object'.
The result must be a valid array.
I don't think you can return an array back to PowerApps. You would have to return the response as a JSON string, then have your PowerApp do the logic to convert the JSON string into a collection.
Likely your PowerApp would have to include something like this to convert the JSON string that's returned from the flow:
ClearCollect(
*collectionName*,
MatchAll(
*JSON_String*,
*"\{""date"":""(?<date>[^""]*)"",""message"":""(?<message>[^""]*)"",""user"":""(?<user>[^""]*)""\}"*
));
Flow returning response body to PowerApp
If I understand you correctly, you want to retrieve 14000 records from the Sharepoint list, and not just the total count.
Would this mean I don't have to worry about Delegation if the list has more than 2000 items?
Yes, when you use a cloud flow rather than directly accessing Sharepoint list from Powerapps, you basically avoid delegation of 2k records.
Now coming back to you main topic of retrieving Records, you would have to Test and run your flow and check what does the below http return. I believe it returns a JSON Array.
concat( '_api/web/lists/GetbyTitle(''', first( body('Filter_Library_List_Being_Queried') )?['displayName'], ''')/Items' )
You would have to apply a for each or clean your JSON output to return String Array or JSON Array as output of your all 14K Records.
In addition if you are using Sharepoint online why not use connector for flow mentioned here
I'm using SugarCRM rest API, and according to the documentation, to get a set of records, I have to use /<module> GET endpoint and pass JSON in the body to filter the query.
First, is it even possible to have a body in a GET request ?
and how can I build this kind of request then ?
I'm using postman and tried to pass parameters as query strings but it's not possible though.
As far as I know you have to put everything in the query string, which might look different to what you'd expect.
Example for a request to /Users:
{
max_num: 100,
fields: ["first_name", "last_name"],
filter: [
{"user_name":"admin"}
{"status":"Active"}
]
}
Written as query string this request will look like this:
/rest/v10/Users?max_num=100&fields=first_name,last_name&filter[0][user_name]=admin&filter[1][status]=Active
Observations regarding the query string format:
There is no { or }, the values of the request object are placed directly in the query string
Key-Value pairs are assigned with =, and separated by & (instead of : and ,)
There are no " or ' quotes at all, strings are written without those
An array of values (here: fields) is just one assignment with all values separated by ,
An array of objects (here: filter) has one Key-Value pair per bottom value and uses [ and ] to indicate the "path" to each value. Using 0-based numerical indices for arrays
Notes
Keep in mind there are length limits to URL incl. query string. E.g. 4096 bytes/chars for Apache 2, if I remember correctly. If you have to send very elaborate requests, you might want to use POST /rest/v10/<module>/filter instead.
URL-escaped (usually not necessary) the example filter would look like this:
/rest/v10/Users?max_num%3D100%26fields%3Dfirst_name%2Clast_name%26filter%5B0%5D%5Buser_name%5D%3Dadmin%26filter%5B1%5D%5Bstatus%5D%3DActive
I would like something similar to what node-odata offers, but I do not want to wrap it around my database (I am using Cassandra and already have an Express app set up with routes, etc).
Currently, I grab data from the database (which will ultimately return a JSON object to the user) and then using the values passed in the query string I modify the results with JavaScript and pass the modified JSON object on through to the user.
I cannot pass in a query string like this http://localhost:3001/getSomeData?name=jim&age=21||eyeColor=red which includes logical operators in the query string, and would grab all data and filter it where the name is "jim", the age is "21" OR eyeColor is "red". So this would give me all Jims that have either eyeColor red and/or age of 21. If I used this age=21&&eyeColor=red I would expect to get all Jims that have BOTH eye color of red and are 21 years old.
I was thinking of using a custom query string that can be passed in (i.e. inclusive=age&inclusive=eyeColor appended at the end of the query string) and in Node, I would modify the filter results to treat these properties (age and eyeColor) as if they were passed in with the || OR operator). However, this is quite verbose, and I was hoping there was a library or another simpler implementation out there that solves this problem, or somehow lets me pass in simple logical operators into the query string.
I ended up using this library to achieve what I wanted: https://www.npmjs.com/package/jspath
It's well document and worked perfectly for my situation.
npm i querystringify //or
https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/qs/6.7.0/qs.min.js
//it will will return an object
const myObject = Qs.parse(location.search, {ignoreQueryPrefix: true});
//you can use object destructuring.
const {age,eyeColor}=Qs.parse(location.search, {ignoreQueryPrefix: true})
By default, parsing will include "?" too.
{ignoreQueryPrefix: true} this option will omit "?".
I have questions about JSON returning from the server using the Microsoft oData API.
Cannot figure it out.
Query1:
http://localhost:63717/odata/City(1)
Fiddler returns the raw data below.
Everything is in its own brackets.
{
"odata.metadata":"http://localhost:63717/odata/$metadata#City/#Element","CityID":1,"CityName":"Minnetonka","CityAddr1":null,"CityAddr2":null,"CityCity":null,"CityState":null,"CityZip":null,"CityPhone":null,"CityFAX":null,"CityExtent":"-93.53,44.88,-93.39,44.93","CityHeaderImage":null
}
Query2:
http://localhost:63717/odata/City?$filter=CityName eq 'Minnetonka'
Fiddler returns the raw data below.
Data is in two sets of bracketed data
{
"odata.metadata":"http://localhost:63717/odata/$metadata#City","value":[
{
"CityID":1,"CityName":"Minnetonka","CityAddr1":null,"CityAddr2":null,"CityCity":null,"CityState":null,"CityZip":null,"CityPhone":null,"CityFAX":null,"CityExtent":"-93.53,44.88,-93.39,44.93","CityHeaderImage":null
}
]
}
What do I have to do to format my JSON coming back for $filters in the oData request?
That odata.metadata is killing me in Query2.
Please explain what I am doing wrong.
In the first example, you have just one City element (denoted by City(1) in the request and #City/#Element in the result path).
In the second example, the value property in result is showing an array of City types (a listing of one or more objects). [ ... ] denotes an array in JavaScript. For a $filter type query, this is what I would expect. You can also see that the response path is less specific (#City instead of #City/#Element).
The path shown in the odata.metadata property value describes the structure of the element being returned, as I showed two examples above. The format of the return data will change depending on how you request it.
If you're having trouble parsing the JSON returned, consider using a library to do the heavy lifting for you. For example:
datajs
JayData
Breeze.js
[Source]
You are not doing anything wrong, the two formats actually represent two different forms of result.
The first you are requesting a single item as you are specifying the key for the entity.
In the second you are potentially asking for a list of entities. The Odata.Metadata is separate in this response otherwise it would be repeated for every item returned and would be a waste in terms of content length.
Because of the way that you are addressing the entity.
With //localhost:63717/odata/City(1) you are addressing one entity ("/entityset/key"). You will always return back one City (if one exists). There is no need for it to return an array because it will never return more than one.
With //localhost:63717/odata/City you are addressing a collection of entities ("/entityset"). 0 to n City entities could be returned, hence the need for a collection.
Is it possible to return multiple JSON objects in the request header with Struts1? I am presently returning a single JSON objects, however the need now is to return a second data structure. All the client-side processing works perfectly for the single data structure in the single JSON objects, I really do not want to complicate it by putting two hetrogenous data structures in a single return JSON object. tia.
I don't know struts or why you can't return multiple JSON objects, but if you genuinely can't, why don't you return a list of your objects? you can unbox them at the receiving end.
in other words, if you were previously returning obj = {...}, and now need to return that as well as obj2 = {...}, you can return [obj, obj2].
maybe this doesn't solve your problem, but it'll get you around it pretty easily.