You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@isis.apache.org by Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com> on 2015/11/30 20:08:09 UTC
record not seen in collection
Hi,
I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a collection, both
are present in the database and get selected by the native query that DN
creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed.
This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is not
displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue apparently.
Any ideas?
Re: record not seen in collection
Posted by Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com>.
Cannot think how, but I will keep that in mind, cheers
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:26 AM, Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>
wrote:
> Application tenancy might be filtering it client side?
> On 30 Nov 2015 19:08, "Stephen Cameron" <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a collection, both
> > are present in the database and get selected by the native query that DN
> > creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed.
> >
> > This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is not
> > displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue apparently.
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
>
Re: record not seen in collection
Posted by Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>.
Application tenancy might be filtering it client side?
On 30 Nov 2015 19:08, "Stephen Cameron" <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a collection, both
> are present in the database and get selected by the native query that DN
> creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed.
>
> This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is not
> displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue apparently.
>
> Any ideas?
>
RE: record not seen in collection
Posted by Cesar Lugo <ce...@sisorg.com.mx>.
Just in case it might help: If you have the collection defined using sorteSet, and the properties you use in the compareTo of the domain entity class happen to have duplicates in the database, the collection will only show one of them.
Cesar.
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Cameron [mailto:steve.cameron.62@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 5:14 PM
To: users@isis.apache.org
Subject: Re: record not seen in collection
Thanks Dan, I will check these when home this evening.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>
wrote:
> First, I would remove the entry in isis.properties (or in your
> AppManifest) that registers the TenantedAuthorizationFacetFactory (as
> per the README
> [1]) to check that the record that's gone missing now appears. If so,
> it confirms that it is indeed tenancy.
>
> Second, I would reinstate the facetfactory and then put a breakpoint
> in TenantedAuthorizationFacetDefault [2] and trace through the logic
> for the object that gets hidden. It implements the algorithm
> described in the README [3]
>
>
> HTH
> Dan
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#tenancy-checking
> [2]
>
> https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security/blob/master/dom/src
> /main/java/org/isisaddons/module/security/facets/TenantedAuthorization
> FacetDefault.java#L72 [3]
> https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#application-tenancy
>
>
> On 30 November 2015 at 20:00, Stephen Cameron
> <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think this is going to take a bit of effort to sort out, it does
> > seem
> to
> > be related to the region, which is the one I use for returning a
> > tenancy path for each entity. So given that it was working before
> > adding tenancy, which I can can check, that will be a clue as to where to look later.
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Stephen Cameron <
> > steve.cameron.62@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Here are the relevant Native queries, they relate to a parent
> > > record
> and
> > > two children in the activity table, ids are <29>, <30>, <31>
> > >
> > > 05:46:41,713 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > >
> >
> a0.createdby,a0.createdon,a0.lastmodifiedby,a0.lastmodifiedon,a0.appro
> ximateenddatetime,a0.copiedfromactivityid,a0.costforparticipant,a0.des
> cription,a0.isrestricted,a0.`name`,a0.oldid,a0.scheduleid,a0.startdate
> time,a0.activity_id,a0.classifier
> > > FROM activity a0 WHERE a0.classifier = 'EVENT' AND
> a0.parent_activity_id
> > =
> > > <29>
> > > 05:46:41,723 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name
> > > = b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <30>
> > > 05:46:41,726 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name
> > > = b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <31>
> > > 05:46:41,756 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > >
> >
> b0.createdby,b0.createdon,b0.lastmodifiedby,b0.lastmodifiedon,b0.appro
> ximateenddatetime,b0.copiedfromactivityid,b0.costforparticipant,b0.des
> cription,b0.isrestricted,b0.`name`,b0.oldid,b0.scheduleid,b0.startdate
> time,b0.periodicity,b0.activity_id,b0.classifier
> > > FROM activity a0 LEFT OUTER JOIN activity b0 ON
> > > a0.parentactivity_activity_id = b0.activity_id WHERE
> > > a0.activity_id =
> > <31>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It has to find the region for 30 and 31 to do a comparison I
> > > assume,
> > which
> > > is:
> > >
> > > return ObjectContracts.compare(other, this, "name",
> > > "startDateTime", "region");
> > >
> > > So it seems to reject id=30 as being of no interest?
> > >
> > > I tried Guava compare but i broke all my tests, maybe I'll have
> > > another
> > go
> > >
> > > region is the same for both, the startDateTime differs though.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Stephen Cameron <
> > > steve.cameron.62@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a
> > >> collection,
> both
> > >> are present in the database and get selected by the native query
> > >> that
> DN
> > >> creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed.
> > >>
> > >> This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is
> > >> not displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue
> apparently.
> > >>
> > >> Any ideas?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Re: record not seen in collection
Posted by Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com>.
Found the anwser here, there was no problem, well only one within my head.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Stephen Cameron <steve.cameron.62@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Thanks, I have seen that before, but in this case I don't think it is the
> cause (I've eliminated the possibility of 'duplicates' with a unique key
> too).
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Cesar Lugo <ce...@sisorg.com.mx>
> wrote:
>
>> Just in case it might help: If you have the collection defined using
>> sorteSet, and the properties you use in the compareTo of the domain entity
>> class happen to have duplicates in the database, the collection will only
>> show one of them.
>>
>> Cesar.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stephen Cameron [mailto:steve.cameron.62@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 5:14 PM
>> To: users@isis.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: record not seen in collection
>>
>> Thanks Dan, I will check these when home this evening.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Dan Haywood <dan@haywood-associates.co.uk
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > First, I would remove the entry in isis.properties (or in your
>> > AppManifest) that registers the TenantedAuthorizationFacetFactory (as
>> > per the README
>> > [1]) to check that the record that's gone missing now appears. If so,
>> > it confirms that it is indeed tenancy.
>> >
>> > Second, I would reinstate the facetfactory and then put a breakpoint
>> > in TenantedAuthorizationFacetDefault [2] and trace through the logic
>> > for the object that gets hidden. It implements the algorithm
>> > described in the README [3]
>> >
>> >
>> > HTH
>> > Dan
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > [1]
>> > https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#tenancy-checking
>> > [2]
>> >
>> > https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security/blob/master/dom/src
>> > /main/java/org/isisaddons/module/security/facets/TenantedAuthorization
>> > FacetDefault.java#L72 [3]
>> > https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#application-tenancy
>> >
>> >
>> > On 30 November 2015 at 20:00, Stephen Cameron
>> > <st...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > I think this is going to take a bit of effort to sort out, it does
>> > > seem
>> > to
>> > > be related to the region, which is the one I use for returning a
>> > > tenancy path for each entity. So given that it was working before
>> > > adding tenancy, which I can can check, that will be a clue as to
>> where to look later.
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Stephen Cameron <
>> > > steve.cameron.62@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Here are the relevant Native queries, they relate to a parent
>> > > > record
>> > and
>> > > > two children in the activity table, ids are <29>, <30>, <31>
>> > > >
>> > > > 05:46:41,713 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > a0.createdby,a0.createdon,a0.lastmodifiedby,a0.lastmodifiedon,a0.appro
>> > ximateenddatetime,a0.copiedfromactivityid,a0.costforparticipant,a0.des
>> > cription,a0.isrestricted,a0.`name`,a0.oldid,a0.scheduleid,a0.startdate
>> > time,a0.activity_id,a0.classifier
>> > > > FROM activity a0 WHERE a0.classifier = 'EVENT' AND
>> > a0.parent_activity_id
>> > > =
>> > > > <29>
>> > > > 05:46:41,723 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
>> > > > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name
>> > > > = b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <30>
>> > > > 05:46:41,726 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
>> > > > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name
>> > > > = b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <31>
>> > > > 05:46:41,756 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > b0.createdby,b0.createdon,b0.lastmodifiedby,b0.lastmodifiedon,b0.appro
>> > ximateenddatetime,b0.copiedfromactivityid,b0.costforparticipant,b0.des
>> > cription,b0.isrestricted,b0.`name`,b0.oldid,b0.scheduleid,b0.startdate
>> > time,b0.periodicity,b0.activity_id,b0.classifier
>> > > > FROM activity a0 LEFT OUTER JOIN activity b0 ON
>> > > > a0.parentactivity_activity_id = b0.activity_id WHERE
>> > > > a0.activity_id =
>> > > <31>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > It has to find the region for 30 and 31 to do a comparison I
>> > > > assume,
>> > > which
>> > > > is:
>> > > >
>> > > > return ObjectContracts.compare(other, this, "name",
>> > > > "startDateTime", "region");
>> > > >
>> > > > So it seems to reject id=30 as being of no interest?
>> > > >
>> > > > I tried Guava compare but i broke all my tests, maybe I'll have
>> > > > another
>> > > go
>> > > >
>> > > > region is the same for both, the startDateTime differs though.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Stephen Cameron <
>> > > > steve.cameron.62@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Hi,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a
>> > > >> collection,
>> > both
>> > > >> are present in the database and get selected by the native query
>> > > >> that
>> > DN
>> > > >> creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is
>> > > >> not displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue
>> > apparently.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Any ideas?
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>
Re: record not seen in collection
Posted by Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, I have seen that before, but in this case I don't think it is the
cause (I've eliminated the possibility of 'duplicates' with a unique key
too).
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Cesar Lugo <ce...@sisorg.com.mx>
wrote:
> Just in case it might help: If you have the collection defined using
> sorteSet, and the properties you use in the compareTo of the domain entity
> class happen to have duplicates in the database, the collection will only
> show one of them.
>
> Cesar.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Cameron [mailto:steve.cameron.62@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 5:14 PM
> To: users@isis.apache.org
> Subject: Re: record not seen in collection
>
> Thanks Dan, I will check these when home this evening.
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > First, I would remove the entry in isis.properties (or in your
> > AppManifest) that registers the TenantedAuthorizationFacetFactory (as
> > per the README
> > [1]) to check that the record that's gone missing now appears. If so,
> > it confirms that it is indeed tenancy.
> >
> > Second, I would reinstate the facetfactory and then put a breakpoint
> > in TenantedAuthorizationFacetDefault [2] and trace through the logic
> > for the object that gets hidden. It implements the algorithm
> > described in the README [3]
> >
> >
> > HTH
> > Dan
> >
> >
> >
> > [1]
> > https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#tenancy-checking
> > [2]
> >
> > https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security/blob/master/dom/src
> > /main/java/org/isisaddons/module/security/facets/TenantedAuthorization
> > FacetDefault.java#L72 [3]
> > https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#application-tenancy
> >
> >
> > On 30 November 2015 at 20:00, Stephen Cameron
> > <st...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I think this is going to take a bit of effort to sort out, it does
> > > seem
> > to
> > > be related to the region, which is the one I use for returning a
> > > tenancy path for each entity. So given that it was working before
> > > adding tenancy, which I can can check, that will be a clue as to where
> to look later.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Stephen Cameron <
> > > steve.cameron.62@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Here are the relevant Native queries, they relate to a parent
> > > > record
> > and
> > > > two children in the activity table, ids are <29>, <30>, <31>
> > > >
> > > > 05:46:41,713 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > > >
> > >
> > a0.createdby,a0.createdon,a0.lastmodifiedby,a0.lastmodifiedon,a0.appro
> > ximateenddatetime,a0.copiedfromactivityid,a0.costforparticipant,a0.des
> > cription,a0.isrestricted,a0.`name`,a0.oldid,a0.scheduleid,a0.startdate
> > time,a0.activity_id,a0.classifier
> > > > FROM activity a0 WHERE a0.classifier = 'EVENT' AND
> > a0.parent_activity_id
> > > =
> > > > <29>
> > > > 05:46:41,723 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > > > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name
> > > > = b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <30>
> > > > 05:46:41,726 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > > > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name
> > > > = b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <31>
> > > > 05:46:41,756 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > > >
> > >
> > b0.createdby,b0.createdon,b0.lastmodifiedby,b0.lastmodifiedon,b0.appro
> > ximateenddatetime,b0.copiedfromactivityid,b0.costforparticipant,b0.des
> > cription,b0.isrestricted,b0.`name`,b0.oldid,b0.scheduleid,b0.startdate
> > time,b0.periodicity,b0.activity_id,b0.classifier
> > > > FROM activity a0 LEFT OUTER JOIN activity b0 ON
> > > > a0.parentactivity_activity_id = b0.activity_id WHERE
> > > > a0.activity_id =
> > > <31>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It has to find the region for 30 and 31 to do a comparison I
> > > > assume,
> > > which
> > > > is:
> > > >
> > > > return ObjectContracts.compare(other, this, "name",
> > > > "startDateTime", "region");
> > > >
> > > > So it seems to reject id=30 as being of no interest?
> > > >
> > > > I tried Guava compare but i broke all my tests, maybe I'll have
> > > > another
> > > go
> > > >
> > > > region is the same for both, the startDateTime differs though.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Stephen Cameron <
> > > > steve.cameron.62@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a
> > > >> collection,
> > both
> > > >> are present in the database and get selected by the native query
> > > >> that
> > DN
> > > >> creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed.
> > > >>
> > > >> This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is
> > > >> not displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue
> > apparently.
> > > >>
> > > >> Any ideas?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
Re: record not seen in collection
Posted by Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Dan, I will check these when home this evening.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>
wrote:
> First, I would remove the entry in isis.properties (or in your AppManifest)
> that registers the TenantedAuthorizationFacetFactory (as per the README
> [1]) to check that the record that's gone missing now appears. If so, it
> confirms that it is indeed tenancy.
>
> Second, I would reinstate the facetfactory and then put a breakpoint in
> TenantedAuthorizationFacetDefault [2] and trace through the logic for the
> object that gets hidden. It implements the algorithm described in the
> README [3]
>
>
> HTH
> Dan
>
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#tenancy-checking
> [2]
>
> https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security/blob/master/dom/src/main/java/org/isisaddons/module/security/facets/TenantedAuthorizationFacetDefault.java#L72
> [3] https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#application-tenancy
>
>
> On 30 November 2015 at 20:00, Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think this is going to take a bit of effort to sort out, it does seem
> to
> > be related to the region, which is the one I use for returning a tenancy
> > path for each entity. So given that it was working before adding tenancy,
> > which I can can check, that will be a clue as to where to look later.
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Stephen Cameron <
> > steve.cameron.62@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Here are the relevant Native queries, they relate to a parent record
> and
> > > two children in the activity table, ids are <29>, <30>, <31>
> > >
> > > 05:46:41,713 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > >
> >
> a0.createdby,a0.createdon,a0.lastmodifiedby,a0.lastmodifiedon,a0.approximateenddatetime,a0.copiedfromactivityid,a0.costforparticipant,a0.description,a0.isrestricted,a0.`name`,a0.oldid,a0.scheduleid,a0.startdatetime,a0.activity_id,a0.classifier
> > > FROM activity a0 WHERE a0.classifier = 'EVENT' AND
> a0.parent_activity_id
> > =
> > > <29>
> > > 05:46:41,723 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name =
> > > b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <30>
> > > 05:46:41,726 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name =
> > > b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <31>
> > > 05:46:41,756 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > >
> >
> b0.createdby,b0.createdon,b0.lastmodifiedby,b0.lastmodifiedon,b0.approximateenddatetime,b0.copiedfromactivityid,b0.costforparticipant,b0.description,b0.isrestricted,b0.`name`,b0.oldid,b0.scheduleid,b0.startdatetime,b0.periodicity,b0.activity_id,b0.classifier
> > > FROM activity a0 LEFT OUTER JOIN activity b0 ON
> > > a0.parentactivity_activity_id = b0.activity_id WHERE a0.activity_id =
> > <31>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It has to find the region for 30 and 31 to do a comparison I assume,
> > which
> > > is:
> > >
> > > return ObjectContracts.compare(other, this, "name", "startDateTime",
> > > "region");
> > >
> > > So it seems to reject id=30 as being of no interest?
> > >
> > > I tried Guava compare but i broke all my tests, maybe I'll have another
> > go
> > >
> > > region is the same for both, the startDateTime differs though.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Stephen Cameron <
> > > steve.cameron.62@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a collection,
> both
> > >> are present in the database and get selected by the native query that
> DN
> > >> creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed.
> > >>
> > >> This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is not
> > >> displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue
> apparently.
> > >>
> > >> Any ideas?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
Re: record not seen in collection
Posted by Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>.
First, I would remove the entry in isis.properties (or in your AppManifest)
that registers the TenantedAuthorizationFacetFactory (as per the README
[1]) to check that the record that's gone missing now appears. If so, it
confirms that it is indeed tenancy.
Second, I would reinstate the facetfactory and then put a breakpoint in
TenantedAuthorizationFacetDefault [2] and trace through the logic for the
object that gets hidden. It implements the algorithm described in the
README [3]
HTH
Dan
[1] https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#tenancy-checking
[2]
https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security/blob/master/dom/src/main/java/org/isisaddons/module/security/facets/TenantedAuthorizationFacetDefault.java#L72
[3] https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security#application-tenancy
On 30 November 2015 at 20:00, Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I think this is going to take a bit of effort to sort out, it does seem to
> be related to the region, which is the one I use for returning a tenancy
> path for each entity. So given that it was working before adding tenancy,
> which I can can check, that will be a clue as to where to look later.
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Stephen Cameron <
> steve.cameron.62@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Here are the relevant Native queries, they relate to a parent record and
> > two children in the activity table, ids are <29>, <30>, <31>
> >
> > 05:46:41,713 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> >
> a0.createdby,a0.createdon,a0.lastmodifiedby,a0.lastmodifiedon,a0.approximateenddatetime,a0.copiedfromactivityid,a0.costforparticipant,a0.description,a0.isrestricted,a0.`name`,a0.oldid,a0.scheduleid,a0.startdatetime,a0.activity_id,a0.classifier
> > FROM activity a0 WHERE a0.classifier = 'EVENT' AND a0.parent_activity_id
> =
> > <29>
> > 05:46:41,723 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name =
> > b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <30>
> > 05:46:41,726 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> > b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name =
> > b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <31>
> > 05:46:41,756 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> >
> b0.createdby,b0.createdon,b0.lastmodifiedby,b0.lastmodifiedon,b0.approximateenddatetime,b0.copiedfromactivityid,b0.costforparticipant,b0.description,b0.isrestricted,b0.`name`,b0.oldid,b0.scheduleid,b0.startdatetime,b0.periodicity,b0.activity_id,b0.classifier
> > FROM activity a0 LEFT OUTER JOIN activity b0 ON
> > a0.parentactivity_activity_id = b0.activity_id WHERE a0.activity_id =
> <31>
> >
> >
> >
> > It has to find the region for 30 and 31 to do a comparison I assume,
> which
> > is:
> >
> > return ObjectContracts.compare(other, this, "name", "startDateTime",
> > "region");
> >
> > So it seems to reject id=30 as being of no interest?
> >
> > I tried Guava compare but i broke all my tests, maybe I'll have another
> go
> >
> > region is the same for both, the startDateTime differs though.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Stephen Cameron <
> > steve.cameron.62@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a collection, both
> >> are present in the database and get selected by the native query that DN
> >> creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed.
> >>
> >> This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is not
> >> displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue apparently.
> >>
> >> Any ideas?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Re: record not seen in collection
Posted by Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com>.
I think this is going to take a bit of effort to sort out, it does seem to
be related to the region, which is the one I use for returning a tenancy
path for each entity. So given that it was working before adding tenancy,
which I can can check, that will be a clue as to where to look later.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Here are the relevant Native queries, they relate to a parent record and
> two children in the activity table, ids are <29>, <30>, <31>
>
> 05:46:41,713 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> a0.createdby,a0.createdon,a0.lastmodifiedby,a0.lastmodifiedon,a0.approximateenddatetime,a0.copiedfromactivityid,a0.costforparticipant,a0.description,a0.isrestricted,a0.`name`,a0.oldid,a0.scheduleid,a0.startdatetime,a0.activity_id,a0.classifier
> FROM activity a0 WHERE a0.classifier = 'EVENT' AND a0.parent_activity_id =
> <29>
> 05:46:41,723 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name =
> b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <30>
> 05:46:41,726 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name =
> b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <31>
> 05:46:41,756 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
> b0.createdby,b0.createdon,b0.lastmodifiedby,b0.lastmodifiedon,b0.approximateenddatetime,b0.copiedfromactivityid,b0.costforparticipant,b0.description,b0.isrestricted,b0.`name`,b0.oldid,b0.scheduleid,b0.startdatetime,b0.periodicity,b0.activity_id,b0.classifier
> FROM activity a0 LEFT OUTER JOIN activity b0 ON
> a0.parentactivity_activity_id = b0.activity_id WHERE a0.activity_id = <31>
>
>
>
> It has to find the region for 30 and 31 to do a comparison I assume, which
> is:
>
> return ObjectContracts.compare(other, this, "name", "startDateTime",
> "region");
>
> So it seems to reject id=30 as being of no interest?
>
> I tried Guava compare but i broke all my tests, maybe I'll have another go
>
> region is the same for both, the startDateTime differs though.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Stephen Cameron <
> steve.cameron.62@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a collection, both
>> are present in the database and get selected by the native query that DN
>> creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed.
>>
>> This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is not
>> displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue apparently.
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: record not seen in collection
Posted by Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com>.
Here are the relevant Native queries, they relate to a parent record and
two children in the activity table, ids are <29>, <30>, <31>
05:46:41,713 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
a0.createdby,a0.createdon,a0.lastmodifiedby,a0.lastmodifiedon,a0.approximateenddatetime,a0.copiedfromactivityid,a0.costforparticipant,a0.description,a0.isrestricted,a0.`name`,a0.oldid,a0.scheduleid,a0.startdatetime,a0.activity_id,a0.classifier
FROM activity a0 WHERE a0.classifier = 'EVENT' AND a0.parent_activity_id =
<29>
05:46:41,723 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name =
b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <30>
05:46:41,726 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
b0.`name` FROM activity a0 INNER JOIN region b0 ON a0.region_name =
b0.`name` WHERE a0.activity_id = <31>
05:46:41,756 [Native qtp730583371-17 DEBUG] SELECT
b0.createdby,b0.createdon,b0.lastmodifiedby,b0.lastmodifiedon,b0.approximateenddatetime,b0.copiedfromactivityid,b0.costforparticipant,b0.description,b0.isrestricted,b0.`name`,b0.oldid,b0.scheduleid,b0.startdatetime,b0.periodicity,b0.activity_id,b0.classifier
FROM activity a0 LEFT OUTER JOIN activity b0 ON
a0.parentactivity_activity_id = b0.activity_id WHERE a0.activity_id = <31>
It has to find the region for 30 and 31 to do a comparison I assume, which
is:
return ObjectContracts.compare(other, this, "name", "startDateTime",
"region");
So it seems to reject id=30 as being of no interest?
I tried Guava compare but i broke all my tests, maybe I'll have another go
region is the same for both, the startDateTime differs though.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Stephen Cameron <st...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a situation where a entity is not displayed in a collection, both
> are present in the database and get selected by the native query that DN
> creates, but for some reason one of the two is not displayed.
>
> This is kind of bizarre as when the two are created the first is not
> displayed, but the second is, so its not a comparison issue apparently.
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
>
>
>