I need to save some cms pages and delete others in a single transaction.
So, how to I make this:
$page1->save();
$page2->delete();
A single transaction? For reference, both $page1 and $page2 come from Mage::getModel('cms/page'). Also, I found an excellent answer here that tells me how to do two saves in a transaction, but not how to do both a save and delete. How can it be done?
If you must do this in a single transaction, just call isDeleted(true) on those items which you wish to be deleted:
//Build out previous items, then for each which should be deleted...
$page2->isDeleted(true);
$transaction = Mage::getModel('core/resource_transaction');
$transaction->addObject($page1)
$transaction->addObject($page2)
//$transaction->addObject(...) etc...
$transaction->save();
Thought I should add an explanation (from Mage_Core_Model_Abstract::save() [link]):
/**
* Save object data
*
* #return Mage_Core_Model_Abstract
*/
public function save()
{
/**
* Direct deleted items to delete method
*/
if ($this->isDeleted()) {
return $this->delete();
}
// ...
}
Related
It's the first time I run into this problem. I want to create a doctrine object and pass it along without having to flush it.
Right after it's creation, I can display some value in the object, but I can't access nested object:
$em->persist($filter);
print_r($filter->getDescription() . "\n");
print_r(count($filter->getAssetClasses()));
die;
I get:
filter description -- 0
(I should have 19 assetClass)
If I flush $filter, i still have the same issue (why oh why !)
The solution is to refresh it:
$em->persist($filter);
$em->flush();
$em->refresh($filter);
print_r($filter->getDescription() . " -- ");
print_r(count($filter->getAssetClasses()));
die;
I get:
filter description -- 19
unfortunately, you can't refresh without flushing.
On my entities, I've got the following:
in class Filter:
public function __construct()
{
$this->filterAssetClasses = new ArrayCollection();
$this->assetClasses = new ArrayCollection();
}
/**
* #var Collection
*
* #ORM\OneToMany(targetEntity="FilterAssetClass", mappedBy="filterAssetClasses", cascade={"persist"})
*/
private $filterAssetClasses;
public function addFilterAssetClass(\App\CoreBundle\Entity\FilterAssetClass $filterAssetClass)
{
$this->filterAssetClasses[] = $filterAssetClass;
$filterAssetClass->setFilter($this);
return $this;
}
in class FilterAssetClass:
/**
* #var Filter
*
* #ORM\ManyToOne(targetEntity="App\CoreBundle\Entity\Filter", inversedBy="filterAssetClasses")
*/
private $filter;
/**
* #var Filter
*
* #ORM\ManyToOne(targetEntity="AssetClass")
*/
private $assetClass;
public function setFilter(\App\CoreBundle\Entity\Filter $filter)
{
$this->filter = $filter;
return $this;
}
Someone else did write the code for the entities, and i'm a bit lost. I'm not a Doctrine expert, so if someone could point me in the good direction, that would be awesome.
Julien
but I can't access nested object
Did you set those assetClasses in the first place?
When you work with objects in memory (before persist), you can add and set all nested objects, and use those while still in memory.
My guess is that you believe that you need to store objects to database in order for them to get their IDs assigned.
IMHO, that is a bad practice and often causes problems. You can use ramsey/uuid library instead, and set IDs in Entity constructor:
public function __construct() {
$this->id = Uuid::uuid4();
}
A database should be used only as a means for storing data. No business logic should be there.
I would recommend this video on Doctrine good practices, and about the above mentioned stuff.
Your problem is not related to doctrine nor the persist/flush/refresh sequence; the problem you describe is only a symptom of bad code. As others have suggested, you should not be relying on the database to get at your data model. You should be able to get what you are after entirely without using the database; the database only stores the data when you are done with it.
Your Filter class should include some code that manages this:
// Filter
public function __contsruct()
{
$this->filterAssetClasses = new ArrayCollection();
}
/**
* #ORM\OneToMany(targetEntity="FilterAssetClass", mappedBy="filterAssetClasses", cascade={"persist"})
*/
private $filterAssetClasses;
public function addFilterAssetClass(FilterAssetClass $class)
{
// assuming you don't want duplicates...
if ($this->filterAssetClasses->contains($class) {
return;
}
$this->filterAssetClasses[] = $class;
// you also need to set the owning side of this relationship
// for later persistence in the db
// Of course you'll need to create the referenced function in your
// FilterAssetClass entity
$class->addFilter($this);
}
You may have all of this already, but you didn't show enough of your code to know. Note that you should probably not have a function setFilterAssetClass() in your Filter entity.
I have two models, Show and Episode, with a one to many relationship. I have an Observer for each model to watch when they are deleted and do some tasks. If my ShowObserver looks like this everything works properly and cascades down, the EpisodeObserver fires its deleting() method for each Episode that is deleted along with the show:
<?php
/**
* Listen to the Show deleting event.
*
* #param Show $show
* #return void
*/
public function deleting(Show $show)
{
if ($show->isForceDeleting()) {
foreach ($show->episodes()->onlyTrashed()->get() as $episode) {
$episode->forceDelete();
}
} else {
$show->episodes()->delete();
}
}
However, if I change it to looks like this the EpisodeObserver#deleting() methods never fire even though the Episodes do get forceDeleted:
<?php
/**
* Listen to the Show deleting event.
*
* #param Show $show
* #return void
*/
public function deleting(Show $show)
{
if ($show->isForceDeleting()) {
$show->episodes()->onlyTrashed()->forceDelete();
} else {
$show->episodes()->delete();
}
}
Is there something about $show->episodes()->onlyTrashed()->forceDelete(); that is incorrect, or is this potentially a bug?
Check out the documentation (on the red warning block): https://laravel.com/docs/5.3/eloquent#deleting-models
When executing a mass delete statement via Eloquent, the deleting and deleted model events will not be fired for the deleted models. This is because the models are never actually retrieved when executing the delete statement.
This is also same to update call.
So if you need to fire the events, you have no choice but to delete it one by one, or fire your own custom event if performance is critical.
i have the following document:
class Purchase
{
/**
* #MongoDB\Id(strategy="INCREMENT")
*/
protected $id;
...
I'm using this document in a Symfony 2.8.4 project.
In this case, the ID for the first document that i persist is '1', the next one will be '2' and so on.
I'd like to start the counter from 1000, but i can't figure how i can do it inside the "Model part".
Thanks
Unfortunately there is now way to set counter in "Model part", but as the current counters are stored in the database you may alter their values there. For more details how this work you can inspect how IncrementGenerator::generate works.
It could be a perfect use of the SequenceGenerator, but not supported by the platform.
One work-around (out of the model, unfortunately) consists in setting the first ID manually.
In your controller:
$object = new Purchase();
$em = $this->getDoctrine()->getManager():
$metadata = $em->getClassMetadata(get_class($object));
$metadata->setIdGeneratorType($metadata::GENERATOR_TYPE_NONE);
$object->setId(1000);
$em->persist($object);
$em->flush();
print $object->getId(); // 1000
Don't forget to add the setter function in your Purchase document:
/**
* #param int $id
*
* #return Purchase
*/
public function setId($id)
{
$this->id = $id;
return $this;
}
Then, remove this logic (or wrap it in a check to verify that the object is the first being persisted).
I am building an intranet application and i want to be able to have 2 different types of users a regular user and an admin user. I am trying to figure out what would be the best way to go about doing this. Either to have one object for admin type stuff and then one object for user type stuff. Or combine both of that into one object. But i keep getting stuck and not sure how to go about doing that, or if that is even the best way.
Lets say I have the following situations:
1. query the db to get all tasks for all projects that are active.
Admin Query
2. query the db to get all tasks for all projects that are due today and active.
Admin Query
3. Query the db to get all tasks for a specific project that are active.
Admin Query
User Query
4. Query the db to get all tasks for a specific project that are active and due today.
Admin Query
User Query
5. Query the db to get all tasks for a specific project.
Admin Query
User Query
6. Query the db to get all tasks for a specific project, with different status specified.
Admin Query
7. Any one of those queries has an optional parameter to either get the count or the data.
I started the following object but now im a little stuck as which route to go:
public function getTasks($status, $project, $type = "count", $duetoday = NULL)
{
try
{
if($duetoday != NULL){
$today = date("Y-m-d");
$stmt = $this->db->prepare("SELECT * FROM tasks WHERE status=:status
AND $project=:project AND duedate BETWEEN :duedate
AND :duedate");
$stmt->execute(array(':status'=>$status,':project'=>$project,':duedate'=>$today));
}else{
$stmt = $this->db->prepare("SELECT * FROM tasks WHERE status=:status
AND $project=:project");
$stmt->execute(array(':status'=>$status,':project'=>$project));
}
$tasks=$stmt->fetch(PDO::FETCH_ASSOC);
if($stmt->rowCount() > 0)
{
if($type == "count"){
return $stmt->rowCount();
}else{
return $tasks;
}
}else{
return false;
}
}
catch(PDOException $e)
{
echo $e->getMessage();
}
}
I will start with some words about the single responsibility principle. Basically, this means that an object and it's behaviors should have one responsibility. Here, I think your getTasks method is a good opportunity to refactor some code into better object oriented code.
There are actually many things it is doing:
Generate sql
Execute a query
Control the flow of the program
The method generating sql should not have to worry about it's execution, and the method executing it should not have to worry about getting it. This, as a side effect, will also reduce the nesting in a single method.
There is a lot of code to write, which I'll let you do, but if you create classes that implements those interfaces and a controller to use them, you should be able to get through this and write easier to maintain / refactor code:
interface SqlGenerating {
/**
* #param array $params
* #return string
*/
public function makeSql(array $params);
/**
* #param array $params
* #return array
*/
public function makeValues(array $params);
}
interface DBAccessing {
public function __construct(\PDO $pdo);
/**
* #param string $sql
* #param array $values
* #return PDOStatement
*/
public function getStmt($sql, array $values = []);
}
class Controller {
public function __construct(SqlGenerating $sqlGenerator, DBAccessing $dbAccess) {
// associate to private properties
}
public function getTasks($status, $project, $type = "count", $duetoday = null) {
// this function will use the sqlGenerator and the dbAccess to query the db
// this function knows to return the count or the actual rows
}
}
If you haven't already, this is a good time to learn about type-hinting in functions. This requires your function to be passed an object (or an array) to be assured of the behavior of the function. Also, you will notice that I type-hinted the interfaces into the controller. This is to actually be able to switch classes if ever you need a different one to manage sql and db access.
I am new to Magento. I want to build an observer which on cancellation of an order will perform a query to my database and will decide whether the order is cancellable or not (This is decided on the basis of a certain state.). If it can't be cancelled, then it should break the cancel event and display a message that the order cannot be cancelled.
Which event I should choose, order_cancel_after or sales_order_item_cancel, and how can I break out of this event in between?
Thanks in advance. :)
There is no general answer to this, it depends on the context where the event is triggered and what happens there afterwards.
The events don't have an interface to "stop" them and they are not tied to the actual "event" (i.e. order cancellation) other than by name.
So you will have to look at the code of Mage_Sales_Model_Order_Item where sales_order_item_cancel gets triggered (order_cancel_after is obviously the wrong place to look because at that point the order is already cancelled):
/**
* Cancel order item
*
* #return Mage_Sales_Model_Order_Item
*/
public function cancel()
{
if ($this->getStatusId() !== self::STATUS_CANCELED) {
Mage::dispatchEvent('sales_order_item_cancel', array('item'=>$this));
$this->setQtyCanceled($this->getQtyToCancel());
$this->setTaxCanceled($this->getTaxCanceled() + $this->getBaseTaxAmount() * $this->getQtyCanceled() / $this->getQtyOrdered());
$this->setHiddenTaxCanceled($this->getHiddenTaxCanceled() + $this->getHiddenTaxAmount() * $this->getQtyCanceled() / $this->getQtyOrdered());
}
return $this;
}
You see that there is no additional check after the event was dispatched, but it would be possible to set the qty_to_cancel attributes to 0 to uneffect the cancelling.
Your observer method:
public function salesOrderItemCancel(Varien_Event_Observer $observer)
{
$item = $observer->getEvent()->getItem();
if (!$this->_isCancellable($item->getOrder())) {
$item->setQtyToCancel(0);
$this->_showErrorMessage();
}
}
Note that you don't have to set tax_canceled or hidden_tax_canceled because they depend on qty_canceled and thus will stay 0.