I have a service which updates a db column. The update is done using executeUpdate. In my test after the service method I'm trying to load the record. The record loads and every field is populated except for the one I just updated in the service.
To make it stranger, when I run the code normally through a browser it works perfectly. I can look in the database and see that the field is being persisted. It's only the integration test that doesn't work. It's got to be some type of hibernate session issue with the dirty field.
Here is my stripped down code. I left out the controller info. My test calls the controller, the controller calls the service.
class BasicProfile {
static hasMany = [ photos:Photo ]
}
class Photo {
BasicProfile basicProfile
String caption
String publicId
static belongsTo = [ basicPofile:profile ]
}
class PhotoService {
def updateCaption() {
...
Photo.executeUpdate("update Photo p set p.caption = ? where p.basicProfile.id = ? and p.publicId = ? ",
[newCaption, profile.id, publicId])
...
}
}
void testUpdateCaption() {
...
controller.updateCaption() //controller just calls the photoService method
//get json result from controller to load publicId
...
Photo photo = Photo.findByPublicId(publicId)
assertEquals "my new caption", photo.caption //photo.caption is null, but the rest of the photo object is populated properly from the database load
}
I've added a breakpoint on the assert so I can view the photo instance. It's a valid instance and every field is populated with the data from when it was created (prior to calling controller.updateCaption(). But after calling controller.updateCaption(), the caption field should have valid data, but it's still null (the default when the instance is created).
That's probably a cache of your domain instance, try this:
void testUpdateCaption() {
controller.updateCaption()
//force the query in a clean hibernate session
Photo.withNewSession {
def photo = Photo.findByPublicId(publicId)
assertEquals "my new caption", photo.caption
}
}
I am trying to reuse the same form for adding and editing employee information. I am using knockout js and on my view I make the knockout model:
var koModel = new EmployeeModel(div);
and if I want to populate the fields from the server I want to do something like this:
var koModel = new EmployeeModel(unserializedModelFromController, div);
I was wondering what is the best way to distinguish if the request is for a new employee or if it is to edit an existing employee.
If you turn your parameters around you can write a single constructor function.
var EmployeeModel = function(div, model) {
if (model) {
// Existing model has been passed, it's an edit request
} else {
// No model has been passed, it's a new request
}
}
This can be called like:
new EmployeeModel(div);
or
new EmployeeModel(div, model);
You can send a parameter with a default value to the view.
If you are editing an employee, you can send the value of id, you're creating not send.
The function that receives a request to store or edit could have a default value.
public void SaveOrEditEmployee(int id=0, ...) //id=0 is a default value
{
if(id==0)
{
//SaveEmployee
}else
{
//EditEmployee
Employee empl = (x => employee.id == id);
...
}
}
Or you can do likewise, receive full model and assess whether the property 'id' already exists in your database
I have a grails application that has a service that creates reports. The report is defined as:
class Report {
Date createDate
String reportType
List contents
static constraints = {
}
}
The service generates a report and populates contents as a list that is returned by createCriteria.
My problem is that my service claims to be saving the Report, no errors turn up, logging says that its all there, but when I go to call show from the controller on that report, it says contents is null.
Another relevant bit, my Service is called by an ActiveMQ message queue. The message originating from my report controller.
Controller:
class ReportController {
def scaffold = Report
def show = {
def rep = Report.get(params.id)
log.info("Report is " + (rep? "not null" : "null")) //says report is not null
log.info("Report content is " + (rep.contents? "not null" : "null")) //always says report.contents is null.
redirect(action: rep.reportType, model: [results: rep.contents, resultsTotal: rep.contents.size()])
}
}
My service that creates the report:
class ReportService {
static transactional = false
static expose = ['jms']
static destination = "Report"
void onMessage(msg)
{
this."$msg.reportType"(msg)
}
void totalQuery(msg)
{
def results = Result.createCriteria().list {
//This returns exactly what i need.
}
Report.withTransaction() {
def rep = new Report(createDate: new Date(), reportType: "totalQuery", contents: results)
log.info("Validation results: ${rep.validate()}")
if( !rep.save(flush: true) ) {
rep.errors.each {
log.error(it)
}
}
}
}
Is there something obvious that I'm missing here? My thought is that since all my unit tests work, that the hibernate context is not being passed through the message queue. But that would generate Exceptions wouldn't it? I've been beating my head on this problem for days, so a point in the right direction would be great.
Thanks,
You can't define an arbitrary List like that, so it's getting ignored and treated as transient. You'd get the same behavior if you had a def name field, since in both cases Hibernate doesn't know the data type, so it has no idea how to map it to the database.
If you want to refer to a collection of Results, then you need a hasMany:
class Report {
Date createDate
String reportType
static hasMany = [contents: Result]
}
If you need the ordered list, then also add in a List field with the same name, and instead of creating a Set (the default), it will be a List:
class Report {
Date createDate
String reportType
List contents
static hasMany = [contents: Result]
}
Your unit tests work because you're not accessing a database or using Hibernate. I think it's best to always integration test domain classes so you at least use the in-memory database, and mock the domain classes when testing controllers, services, etc.
I'm having an issue with grails. I have a domain that looks like:
class Book {
static belongsTo = Author
String toString() { title }
Author bookAuthor
String title
String currentPage
static constraints = {
bookAuthor()
title(unique:true)
currentPage()
}
}
The main thing to note is that I have title(unique:true) to avoid from adding the same book twice. However, this is causing issues. In the controller I have created:
def populate = {
def bookInstance = new Book()
def dir = 'C:/currentBooks.txt'
def bookList
bookList = readFile(dir) //read file and push values into bookList
int numOfBooks = bookList.size()
numOfBooks.times {
bookInstance.setBookAuthor(bookList.author[it])
bookInstance.setTitle(bookList.title[it])
bookInstance.setCurrentPage(bookList.title[it])
bookInstance.save()
}
}
I call populate to read a file and populate the database with new Books. The problem is that I want to update it with new values. For instance, lets say that the book already exists in the database but I have read farther into the book and want to change the currentPage so the data is changed in the file and populate is called but doesn't update the page because the title already exists.
Can someone explain how to update the results with the new values?
First of all, you need a key for your Book domain object. You have the title marked as unique, which suggests you want to use that to uniquely identify a Book. I'd recommend against that (what happens when two books have the same title?) and use the id grails provides by default. That means you'll have to store the id in your currentBooks.txt in addition to your other fields.
Once you've got an id, you can try loading an existing record from the database. If not, create a new one. For Example:
def dir = 'C:/currentBooks.txt'
def bookList
bookList = readFile(dir) //read file and push values into bookList
int numOfBooks = bookList.size()
numOfBooks.times {
def bookInstance.get(bookList.id[it])
if (!bookInstance) {
bookInstance = new Book()
}
bookInstance.setBookAuthor(bookList.author[it])
bookInstance.setTitle(bookList.title[it])
bookInstance.setCurrentPage(bookList.title[it])
bookInstance.save()
}
Alternatively, you could use the title as the id. This is a bad idea as indicated above, but it saves having to keep track of a separate id and change the format of currentBooks.txt. With Book defined as below, you could call Book.get(bookList.title[it]):
class Book {
static belongsTo = Author
String toString() { title }
Author bookAuthor
String title
String currentPage
static constraints = {
bookAuthor()
title(unique:true)
currentPage()
}
static mapping = {
id name: 'title', generator: 'assigned'
}
}
I have an object which has a circular reference to another object. Given the relationship between these objects this is the right design.
To Illustrate
Machine => Customer => Machine
As is expected I run into an issue when I try to use Json to serialize a machine or customer object. What I am unsure of is how to resolve this issue as I don't want to break the relationship between the Machine and Customer objects. What are the options for resolving this issue?
Edit
Presently I am using Json method provided by the Controller base class. So the serialization I am doing is as basic as:
Json(machineForm);
Update:
Do not try to use NonSerializedAttribute, as the JavaScriptSerializer apparently ignores it.
Instead, use the ScriptIgnoreAttribute in System.Web.Script.Serialization.
public class Machine
{
public string Customer { get; set; }
// Other members
// ...
}
public class Customer
{
[ScriptIgnore]
public Machine Machine { get; set; } // Parent reference?
// Other members
// ...
}
This way, when you toss a Machine into the Json method, it will traverse the relationship from Machine to Customer but will not try to go back from Customer to Machine.
The relationship is still there for your code to do as it pleases with, but the JavaScriptSerializer (used by the Json method) will ignore it.
I'm answering this despite its age because it is the 3rd result (currently) from Google for "json.encode circular reference" and although I don't agree with the answers (completely) above, in that using the ScriptIgnoreAttribute assumes that you won't anywhere in your code want to traverse the relationship in the other direction for some JSON. I don't believe in locking down your model because of one use case.
It did inspire me to use this simple solution.
Since you're working in a View in MVC, you have the Model and you want to simply assign the Model to the ViewData.Model within your controller, go ahead and use a LINQ query within your View to flatten the data nicely removing the offending circular reference for the particular JSON you want like this:
var jsonMachines = from m in machineForm
select new { m.X, m.Y, // other Machine properties you desire
Customer = new { m.Customer.Id, m.Customer.Name, // other Customer properties you desire
}};
return Json(jsonMachines);
Or if the Machine -> Customer relationship is 1..* -> * then try:
var jsonMachines = from m in machineForm
select new { m.X, m.Y, // other machine properties you desire
Customers = new List<Customer>(
(from c in m.Customers
select new Customer()
{
Id = c.Id,
Name = c.Name,
// Other Customer properties you desire
}).Cast<Customer>())
};
return Json(jsonMachines);
Based on txl's answer you have to
disable lazy loading and proxy creation and you can use the normal methods to get your data.
Example:
//Retrieve Items with Json:
public JsonResult Search(string id = "")
{
db.Configuration.LazyLoadingEnabled = false;
db.Configuration.ProxyCreationEnabled = false;
var res = db.Table.Where(a => a.Name.Contains(id)).Take(8);
return Json(res, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
Use to have the same problem. I have created a simple extension method, that "flattens" L2E objects into an IDictionary. An IDictionary is serialized correctly by the JavaScriptSerializer. The resulting Json is the same as directly serializing the object.
Since I limit the level of serialization, circular references are avoided. It also will not include 1->n linked tables (Entitysets).
private static IDictionary<string, object> JsonFlatten(object data, int maxLevel, int currLevel) {
var result = new Dictionary<string, object>();
var myType = data.GetType();
var myAssembly = myType.Assembly;
var props = myType.GetProperties();
foreach (var prop in props) {
// Remove EntityKey etc.
if (prop.Name.StartsWith("Entity")) {
continue;
}
if (prop.Name.EndsWith("Reference")) {
continue;
}
// Do not include lookups to linked tables
Type typeOfProp = prop.PropertyType;
if (typeOfProp.Name.StartsWith("EntityCollection")) {
continue;
}
// If the type is from my assembly == custom type
// include it, but flattened
if (typeOfProp.Assembly == myAssembly) {
if (currLevel < maxLevel) {
result.Add(prop.Name, JsonFlatten(prop.GetValue(data, null), maxLevel, currLevel + 1));
}
} else {
result.Add(prop.Name, prop.GetValue(data, null));
}
}
return result;
}
public static IDictionary<string, object> JsonFlatten(this Controller controller, object data, int maxLevel = 2) {
return JsonFlatten(data, maxLevel, 1);
}
My Action method looks like this:
public JsonResult AsJson(int id) {
var data = Find(id);
var result = this.JsonFlatten(data);
return Json(result, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
In the Entity Framework version 4, there is an option available: ObjectContextOptions.LazyLoadingEnabled
Setting it to false should avoid the 'circular reference' issue. However, you will have to explicitly load the navigation properties that you want to include.
see: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb896272.aspx
Since, to my knowledge, you cannot serialize object references, but only copies you could try employing a bit of a dirty hack that goes something like this:
Customer should serialize its Machine reference as the machine's id
When you deserialize the json code you can then run a simple function on top of it that transforms those id's into proper references.
You need to decide which is the "root" object. Say the machine is the root, then the customer is a sub-object of machine. When you serialise machine, it will serialise the customer as a sub-object in the JSON, and when the customer is serialised, it will NOT serialise it's back-reference to the machine. When your code deserialises the machine, it will deserialise the machine's customer sub-object and reinstate the back-reference from the customer to the machine.
Most serialisation libraries provide some kind of hook to modify how deserialisation is performed for each class. You'd need to use that hook to modify deserialisation for the machine class to reinstate the backreference in the machine's customer. Exactly what that hook is depends on the JSON library you are using.
I've had the same problem this week as well, and could not use anonymous types because I needed to implement an interface asking for a List<MyType>. After making a diagram showing all relationships with navigability, I found out that MyType had a bidirectional relationship with MyObject which caused this circular reference, since they both saved each other.
After deciding that MyObject did not really need to know MyType, and thereby making it a unidirectional relationship this problem was solved.
What I have done is a bit radical, but I don't need the property, which makes the nasty circular-reference-causing error, so I have set it to null before serializing.
SessionTickets result = GetTicketsSession();
foreach(var r in result.Tickets)
{
r.TicketTypes = null; //those two were creating the problem
r.SelectedTicketType = null;
}
return Json(result);
If you really need your properties, you can create a viewmodel which does not hold circular references, but maybe keeps some Id of the important element, that you could use later for restoring the original value.