Umbraco 7, frontend sort order of variant groups - umbraco

Using Umbraco 7.5.4 with TeaCommerce
The product page has several variant groups (e.g. size, color, gender, etc.)
Each variant group is displayed as a dropdown (select).
All is working fine but the dropdown selectors are displayed sorted by the variant group ID.
In backend it is possible to sort the variant groups but that sort order is not reflected in frontend.
How can I change the sort order in frontend? Ideally I would like the frontend using the sortorder created in the backend.

Related

Is there a way to consolidate multiple rows of data in Microsoft Access?

I'm very new to Microsoft Access, and I'm trying to figure out how to output data from a table into a format that's more concise and easier to read.
I have transaction data throughout the year for specific customers. Based off of the Customer number and Catalog number, I would like to consolidate multiple instances of a customer purchasing the same product into one row, run a sum in the Quantity column for instances of the same product, and run a sum in the Price column for instances of the same product.
Desired Output
Input
I tried using an append Query with Customer # and Catalog # as the primary key to try to filter out duplicate entries, but this wasn't working. I'm not super familiar with writing functions in Access, but willing to try anything.

Solr join across multiple collections and fetch data from both collections

I have 2 solr collections:
Ads {id, title, body, description, etc etc)
AdPlacement (ad_id, placement_id, price)
Each Ad can have 500-1000 placements, with different prices.
The search usecase is where I have a placement and some search keyword and I want to find the Ads that map the keyword provided in the title/body/description fields and it should be sorted by the price in the AdPlacement collection for the given placement. We would like to get the Ad details and the price in the output returned.
Is there any way to achieve this in solr using join across multiple collections? What I have read so far says you can only get data from one collection and use the other one just for filtering.
Solr is a Document database and supports nested documents so ideally you would want to model such that your add placement records are a part of the Ad document. This would be the better way to handle your scenario. Please go through this blog Solr Nested Objects and the relevant Solr documentation
In case modifying the document structure is not an option then consider this documentation which mentions about allowing some level of join between collections.

Pseudo Table entries

I'm a learning developer building a Product & Inventory tracking platform for the company I work at and my Rails application has a Products table. Within the Products table are a bunch of basic entries, such as SKU, Description, UPC, Manufacturer, etc.
What I want to do is have an option within the Create page to insert custom parameters into something like a text_area to create Product specific entries, for example if I have only a small set of products that would benefit from a Voltage column and don't want to flood my migration with a bunch of lesser used options. What I'm picturing:
'Voltage|120 Volts'
'Housing Material|Steel'
'Duct Size|4"'
and then these could be their own rows in the Product's Show page.
Is anybody aware of a Gem or template that already accomplishes this, or would I need to dive in the deep end myself? I fear something like this is out of my skillset currently.
You can have one hstore column in the migration which will allow you to store multiple dynamic values in the single column as a hash.
You can read more about hstore from here.
I used hstore to store dynamic variants of product in the table.

Paginated, randomized search result, without clumping

For our RoR-based e-commerce site, we are showing a paginated search result of products. Even when randomized, this list frequently has several products of the same brand clumped together. We want a search result that is "de-clumped" such that products of the same brand don't appear near one another.
For example, if I have thousands of products that belong to 50 brands and I'm showing fewer than 50 products on the page, it shouldn't show more than one product per brand on that page (or preferably some configurable maximum). I would have to maintain a "seed" value of some sort to pass in as the user advances from page to page so that I can recreate the search order.
What algorithm or strategy can I use to accomplish this de-clumped/randomized result?
I could describe the strategy that virtocommerce propose, it woroks on catalog level. Here is possible to group similar "variations" to "products". Then variations could be marked as not visible during search or/and in the e-store main catalog when products are visible and could inherit some "variations" keywords to be searchable. The variations are still purchasable but only from the product page.

Implement security for sharepoint lists

I have a share-point list with which I want to implement three things:
Freeze some columns so that their data can be edited by specific people only like the ones within site owners group with full privileges.
Hide some columns according to some user groups. Earlier I did this by creating two views, one with limited columns selected and visible to all and one with all columns with filter Restricted_user = [Me] and I have put all users' names from active directory in that field, but I guess it has security loopholes like someone could see all row data by selecting view item and everything in that row will be visible to him.
2.1. If my own second option approach is selected can I implement this comparison with group aliases, rather than individuals so that I have to put only group aliases in that column field, rather that all names in that group aliases.
Last but not the least can i break up list rows into two categories so that two different groups can access and edit their own data only.Eg. 20 rows are there 5 accessible to group1 and 15 accessible to group2 but they cant access each others data rows.
Apologies for long question.
The most secure way to accomplish #3 is using item level permissions. Less secure ways include custom views and audiences.
For #1 and #2, you will need to create custom field types. Out of the box SharePoint list columns do not support column based security.

Resources