in the twitter4j library:
Is there a way to reduce the number of results for the twitter.lookupUser method? i.e. only return certain fields or even only fields that are not empty?
I actually already found the answer. So for people who are looking for the same thing:
if you use the lookupUser method a list of Users gets returned. so then you can use all of the User methods on that list. For example getLocation, which only returns the location of the users in the list.
Related
I'm developing an application in Quasar/Electron and using Dexie/IndexedDB for my database. I want to find all distinct records in the database that contain both my Event ID and a Dog ID (both key indexed fields). I am able to do this with the following code:
await myDB.runTable
.orderBy('[fk_event+fk_dog]')
.eachUniqueKey((theDuo) => {
this.runsArray.push({eventID: theDuo[0], dogID: theDuo[1]})
})
I'm using a combined key which is working well. However, I need to have more of the records than just the keys. I need a few more fields, is this possible?
I was trying to get records with the unique key function while also using the where function, but that doesn't seem to work.
I need to get all the unique (distinct?) dogs in the table that are in a particular event. And also get their corresponding information. I'm not sure if there is a better, more efficient way to do this? I can always pull out all the records and loop through them to build a custom array, I was just hoping to do this at the table read level. (yeah I'm still in tables/records even though these are collections etc. :p ).
Even the above code gives me all the events, and I can pull out what I need with a filter. I just was thinking it would be faster and more efficient to do it at the read level.
this.enteredRuns = this.runsArray.filter((theEvent) => {
return ( (theEvent.eventID == this.currentEventID) )
})
Try
await myDB.runTable
.orderBy('[fk_event+fk_dog]')
.clone({unique: "unique"})
.toArray()
I know this isn't documented but it should do the work to use unique cursor while still extracting the whole objects and not just the keys. You cannot combine with where but you could use .filter. Just be aware that not all records with be scanned as it will jump over records with same keys - selecting the first visited records only.
When invoking either
GET /solutions/bookingBusinesses/{id}/calendarView
or
GET /solutions/bookingBusinesses/{id}/appointments
the returned bookingAppointment object has an empty customer array. However the customers appear in the UI. Any idea why this may be the case?
Looks like a bug in Graph API.
According to the documentation the customers property is optional. Sometimes you have to specify optional property in $select statement.
GET solutions/bookingBusinesses/{id}/calendarView?start=2018-04-30T00:00:00Z&end=2018-05-10T00:00:00Z&$select=customers
Another option is trying beta version instead of v1.0
GET beta/solutions/bookingBusinesses/{id}/calendarView?start=2018-04-30T00:00:00Z&end=2018-05-10T00:00:00Z
I have the following code
PagedResultList res = myService.getPage(paginateParams, ...)
println res.size() // returns 2
println res.getTotalCount() // returns 1
getPage looks like:
def criteria = MyDomain.createCriteria()
criteria.list(max: paginateParams.max, offset: paginateParams.offset) { // max is 10, offset is 0, sortBy is updatedAt and sortOrder is desc
eq('org', org)
order(paginateParams.sortBy, paginateParams.sortOrder)
}
why do the two method return different values? The documentation doesn't explain the difference, but does mention that getTotalCount is for number of records
currently on grails 2.4.5
edits:
println on res prints out:
res: [
com.<hidden>.MyDomain: 41679f98-a7c5-4193-bba8-601725007c1a,
com.<hidden>.MyDomain: 41679f98-a7c5-4193-bba8-601725007c1a]
Yes, res has a SINGLE object twice - that's the bug I'm trying to fix. How do I know that? I have an primary key on MyDomain's ID, and when I inspect the database, it's also showing one record for this particular org (see my criteria)
edit 2: I found this comment (http://docs.grails.org/2.4.5/ref/Domain%20Classes/createCriteria.html)
listDistinct If subqueries or associations are used, one may end up
with the same row multiple times in the result set. In Hibernate one
would do a "CriteriaSpecification.DISTINCT_ROOT_ENTITY". In Grails one
can do it by just using this method.
Which, if I understand correctly, is their way of saying "list" method doesn't work in this scenario, use listDistinct instead but then they go on to warn:
The listDistinct() method does not work well with the pagination
options maxResult and firstResult. If you need distinct results with
pagination, we currently recommend that you use HQL. You can find out
more information from this blog post.
However, the blog post is a dead link.
Related: GORM createCriteria and list do not return the same results : what can I do?
Not related to actual problem after question edited but this quote seems useful
Generally PagedResultList .size() perform size() on resultList property (in-memory object represent database record), while .getTotalCount() do count query against database. If this two value didn't match your list may contain duplicate.
After viewing related issues (GORM createCriteria and list do not return the same results : what can I do?) I determined that there were several approaches:
Use grails projection groupBy('id') - doesn't work b/c i need the entire object
USe HSQL - Domain.executeQuery - actually this didn't work for my scenario very well because this returns a list, whereas criteria.list returns a PagedResultList from which I previously got totalCount. This solution had me learning HSQL and also made me break up my existing logic into two components - one that returned PagedResultList and one that didn't
Simply keep a set of IDs as I process my PagedResultList and make sure that I didn't have any duplicates.
I ended up going with option 3 because it was quick, didn't require me to learn a new language (HSQL) and I felt that I could easily write the code to do it and I'm not limited by the CPU to do such a unique ID check.
My app's db has a many to many relationship between a Feed object and a Tweet object. This is to keep track of which feeds every tweet belongs in. If you're familiar with Twitter, imagine the main feed, a list feed, a user profile feed, etc.
How can I make a query using an NSPredicate to get a list of Tweets that exist in a specific Feed (and, inversely, get a list of Feeds that a Tweet exists in)? It seems that queries on inverse relationships does not work in Realm, so what are my options?
If I understand your question correctly this part of the documentation should be helpful:
Inverse Relationships Links are unidirectional. So if a to-many
property Person.dogs links to a Dog instance and a to-one property
Dog.owner links to Person, these links are independent from one
another. Appending a Dog to a Person instance’s dogs property, doesn’t
automatically set the dog’s owner property to this Person. Because
manually synchronizing pairs of relationships is error prone, complex
and duplicates information, Realm exposes an API to retrieve backlinks
described below.
With inverse relationships, you can obtain all objects linking to a
given object through a specific property. For example, calling
Object().linkingObjects(_:forProperty:) on a Dog instance will return
all objects of the specified class linking to the calling instance
with the specified property.
I guess you can do something like:
//assuming your Tweet object has a property like "let feeds = List<Feed>()"
someTweet.linkingObjects(Feed.self, forProperty: "feeds") //should return feeds your Tweet is in
But still I don't think I understand your question clearly. From my point of view your first requirement:
get a list of Tweets that exist in a specific Feed
should have a straightforward solution such as having a property in your Feed object like:
let tweets = List<Tweet>()
I wish you can clarify your situation further.
I wonder if it's possible to simplify the model a bit so many-to-many isn't necessary.
My understanding of Twitter is that tweets aren't 'owned' by any feeds. They simply exist on the platform, and are referenced by any number of feeds, but don't actually belong to any specific feed.
So a model setup like this should be appropriate:
class Tweet : Object {
}
class Feed : Object {
let tweets = List<Tweet>()
}
You can do a reverse lookup on a Tweet to see if there are any feeds in which it is currently visible, and you can simply use the tweets property of Feed objects to see which tweets they're displaying
Since the linkingObjects reverse lookup method of Realm simply returns a standard Swift Array, if you did want to filter that further, you could just use the system APIs (like filter or map) to refine it further.
Otherwise, if you really do want to be able to use Realm's NSPredicate filtering system both ways, then, as messy as it is, you would need to manually have each model linking to a list of the other:
class Tweet : Object {
let feeds = List<Feed>()
}
class Feed : Object {
let tweets = List<Tweet>()
}
While it's not recommended (Since it adds additional work), it's not disallowed.
Good luck!
What is the difference in the objects created with these 2 methods:
tec = Technique.find(6)
tec2 = Technique.where(:korean => 'Jok Sul')
The data returned for each is exactly the same, yet the first object will respond perfectly to an inherited method like update_attributes while the second object will give an error of method not found.
When I do tec.class and tec2.class one is an ActiveRecord::Relation and the other doesn't give me a class at all, it just prints out the content of the object.
Maybe when you use the .where method you get an array, even if there is only one match and therefore you always have to issue the .each method to get at the contents? But that makes it hard to deal with when you want to update records, etc.
Can someone clarify this for me? Specifically, how to deal with matches found through the .where method.
Thanks.
Try:
tec2 = Technique.where(:korean => 'Jok Sul').first
Good question.
tec_scope = Technique.where(:korean => 'Jok Sul') # create an internal query
Remember, here only the query is created, it is not executed. You can programmatically build on top of this query if you so wished. The scope (or query if you so wish) will be executed in 2 ways. "Implicit" or "Explicit". Implicit way of running the query happens for example in the console, which invokes a method on the scope which automatically runs the query for you. This wont happen in your controllers unless you run it explicitly for .e.g
tec_scope.all # returns array
tec_scope.first # retuns one element
Scopes are just adding where clauses/predicates to your query. It's query building and delaying the execution till it is needed.
However,
tec_objects = Technique.find(6) # explicitly runs a query and returns one object (in this case)
This will explicitly run the query there and then. It is a question of the timing of execution of the query.
The difference is subtle but very important.
This hasnt got anything to do with whether you get one result or an array.
Technique.find([4,5]) # will return an array
Technique.find(4) # will return one object
Technique.where(:some_key => "some value").all # will return an array
Technique.where(:id => 5).first # will return one object
The difference is in timing of the execution of the query. Don't let the console fool you into believing there is no difference. Console is implicitly firing the query for you :)
The find(6) returns a single object, because you're specifying the object ID in the database, which is guaranteed to be unique by convention.
The where call returns a collection, which may be only 1 item long, but it still returns a collection, not a single object.
You can reveal this difference. Using your example code, if you call tec.class vs. tec2.class I think you'll find that they aren't the same class of object, as you expect.
That is, the methods available to a collection of objects is different than the methods available on an instance of that object.