Search Results

Search found 12952 results on 519 pages for 'model'.

Page 215/519 | < Previous Page | 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222  | Next Page >

• How do I tell Entity Framework that a column in a view is nullable?

  - by Ryan ONeill

  I have a view which has an Int column which is nullable (let's call it StackOverflowCount). When generating an EF model from the database, the EF designer does not recognise it as nullable and creates the column as an Int. The issue I have is that on the EF designer I have set the column to Nullable and the following error then kills the compilation; Error 3031: Problem in mapping fragments starting at line 2327: Non-nullable column MyView.StackOverflowCount in table MyView is mapped to a nullable entity property. I can get round this by opening the .edmx file in XML mode and manually editing the SQL column definition, but there is no way to do this using the designer and it gets overwritten the next time I refresh from the model from the DB. Is this 'by design' or an example of something that slipped through into EF 4.0? I'm using .Net 4.0 with EF 4.0 under VS 2010.

  Read the article

• Rails 3 loading all models on startup

  - by janechii

  Hi all, I have a class method mixed in to all my models. the method gets called when the model class is evaluated. unfortunately (for me), this seems to be on-demand, whenever the model is needed in development env. how can have rails load all the models at start up? is this even advisable? class Foo < ActiveRecord::Base include Acl register_acl # i need this to be called for all models at start up end thank you!

  Read the article

• Ngen or compile to native code is better

  - by Raghav55

  I want to know which is one better native code generated is NGen.exe is better or run time conversion of IL to native code by JIT ? using System; public class Vehicle { public Vehicle() { } public string Name { get; set; } public string Model { get; set; } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Vehicle aVech = new Vehicle(); aVech.Name = "BUS"; aVech.Model = "1980"; } }

  Read the article

• How to coerce type of ActiveRecord attribute returned by :select phrase on joined table?

  - by tribalvibes

  Having trouble with AR 2.3.5, e.g.: users = User.all( :select => "u.id, c.user_id", :from => "users u, connections c", :conditions => ... ) Returns, e.g.: => [#<User id: 1000>] >> users.first.attributes => {"id"=>1000, "user_id"=>"1000"} Note that AR returns the id of the model searched as numeric but the selected user_id of the joined model as a String, although both are int(11) in the database schema. How could I better form this type of query to select columns of tables backing multiple models and retrieving their natural type rather than String ? Seems like AR is punting on this somewhere. How could I coerce the returned types at AR load time and not have to tack .to_i (etc.) onto every post-hoc access?

  Read the article

• ASP MVC html helpers in partial views

  - by Rabbi

  I am still trying to figure out how to create reusable partial views in MVC Lets say I would like to create a partial view to display a form for submitting an address. Then in my ViewModel I have two addresses (Home address & Work Address) So I would think that in my view I call HTML.Partial for each one like this @Html.Partial("Address", Model.HomeAddress) @Html.Partial("Address", Model.WorkAddress) but what happens is instead of the fields having names like HomeAddress.Street, HomeAddress.City etc. they just have the regular field names Street, City, etc. so the binder on the HTTPPost action has no idea what to do with them Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• ASP.NET GridView throwing error: "Update is disabled for this control".

  - by NTDLS

  I have the absolutely most simple setup imaginable. A single table defined in an Entity model in ASP.net v4, the model is bound directly to a GridView with AutoGenerateEditButton enabled. However, each time I hit edit, then save, the page throws the error “Update is disabled for this control" for which I cannot find a solution. What is causing this error? What can do to resolve it? <% <asp:GridView ID="MenuItemsGrid" runat="server" DataSourceID="gridDataSource" AutoGenerateEditButton="true" AutoGenerateColumns="true"> </asp:GridView> <asp:EntityDataSource ID="gridDataSource" runat="server" ConnectionString="name=dataEntitiesModel" DefaultContainerName="dataEntities" EntitySetName="MenuItems" /> %>

  Read the article

• What is an instance of a field called?

  - by waxwing

  This might be an odd question, but it has actually caused me some headache. In Object oriented programming, there are accepted names for key concepts. In our model, we have classes with methods and fields. Now, going to the data world: An instance of a class is called an object. An instance of a field is called... what? A value? Isn't the term value a little broad for this? I have been offered "property" as well, but isn't property also part of the model and not the data? (This is not purely academic, I am actually coding these concepts.)

  Read the article

• Why I should use an N-Tier Approach When using an SqlDatasource is ALOT EASIER ?

  - by The_AlienCoder

  When it comes to web development I have always tried to work SMART not HARD. So for along time My Aproach to interacting with databases in my AspNet projects has been this : 1) Create my stored procedures 2) Drag an SQLDatasource control on my aspx page 3) Bind a DataList Control to my SQLDatasource 4) Insert, Update & Delete by using my Datalist or programmatically using built in SQLDatasource methods e.g MySqlDataSource.InsertParameters["author"].DefaultValue = TextBox1.Text; MySqlDataSource.Insert(); Recently however I got a relatively easy web project. So I decided to employ a 3-tier Model...But I got exhausted halfway and just didnt seem worth it ! It seemed like I was working too HARD for a project that could have been easily accomplished by a couple of SqlDataSource Controls. So Why Is the N-Tier Model better than my Approach? Has it anything to do with performance? What are the advantages of the ObjectDataSource control over the SqlDataSource Control?

  Read the article

• Backbone inheritance - deep copying

  - by Ed .

  I've seen this question regarding inheritance in Backbone: Backbone.js view inheritance. Useful but doesn't answer my question. The problem I'm experiencing is this: Say I have a class Panel (model in this example); var Panel = Backbone.Model.extend({ defaults : { name : 'my-panel' } }); And then an AdvancedPanel; var AdvancedPanel = Panel.extend({ defaults : { label : 'Click to edit' } }); The following doesn't work: var advancedPanel = new AdvancedPanel(); alert(advancedPanel.get('name')); // Undefined :( JSFiddle here: http://jsfiddle.net/hWmnb/ I guess I can see that I can achieve this myself through some custom extend function that creates a deep copy of the prototype, but this seems like a common thing that people might want from Backbone inheritance, is there a standard way of doing it?

  Read the article

• Good real-world uses of metaclasses (e.g. in Python)

  - by Carles Barrobés

  I'm learning about metaclasses in Python. I think it is a very powerful technique, and I'm looking for good uses for them. I'd like some feedback of good useful real-world examples of using metaclasses. I'm not looking for example code on how to write a metaclass (there are plenty examples of useless metaclasses out there), but real examples where you have applied the technique and it was really the appropriate solution. The rule is: no theoretical possibilities, but metaclasses at work in a real application. I'll start with the one example I know: Django models, for declarative programming, where the base class Model uses a metaclass to fill the model objects of useful ORM functionality from the attribute definitions. Looking forward to your contributions.

  Read the article

• Django Forms save_m2m

  - by John

  Hi I have a model which has 2 many to many fields in it. one is a standard m2m field which does not use any through tables whereas the other is a bit more complecated and has a through table. I am using the Django forms.modelform to display and save the forms. The code I have to save the form is if form.is_valid(): f = form.save(commit=False) f.modified_by = request.user f.save() form.save_m2m() When i try to save the form I get the following error: Cannot set values on a ManyToManyField which specifies an intermediary model. I know this is happening when I do the form.save_m2m() because of the through table. What I'd liek to do is tell Django to ignore the m2m field with the through table but still save the m2m field without the through table. I can then go on to manually save the data for the through table field. Thanks

  Read the article

• ASPNET MVC what do you call this, a partial view? Or something else?

  - by JK

  I'm trying to google for info on a situation, but I dont know what it is called, so its hard to find results :) I have a model with say 10 fields. But only some of those are shown on a particular view, lets say 3 of them: id, name, date. What do you call this kind of view that does not display the whole model? A partial view? The problem is that because 7 fields are not sent to the view, when the Update action is called on the controller, those fields are null, and the DB gets updated with those 7 fields set to null.

  Read the article

• Any good class diagram editors out there for Java (not UML)

  - by user85116

  I'm looking for an editor that can create class diagrams, similar to the typical UML class diagram, but specifically for java (so using java terminology; instead of terms like "generalization, realization etc", we use the java equivalents "interface, abstract class, extends etc"). I've looked into UML several times, but each time I've been turned off by the shear amount of "stuff" that comes with UML. I just want to be able to model my java classes quickly and intuitively, without getting bogged down by all the cruft that comes with UML. Preferably, it would come with a source reader that can keep the diagram up to date, and with a few nice features like "show only public methods in this class" etc. As well, it would automatically "know" about the classes in the standard java library, and possibly even be able to read classes from jars. Performance is also a big thing for me, I don't like having to wait 2 seconds for a popup menu to appear, or watch the diagram jerk crazily while resizing an element in the model. What do you think, am I asking too much?

  Read the article

• Is there an ORM that allows a "plugin" to extend the database?

  - by IP

  So, I've been searching for the answer to this, but I can't find anything I have an Entity Framework Model (MyModel1) - for now, we'll say this contains a "Users" table It's part of a big app, that has a references to an "Addresses" project The addresses project contains an Entity Framework Model (MyModel2), this contains a Users table, and an Addresses table (pointing to the same database. The main app has a control that edits the user, and in that control it has an "addresses" control which actually exists in the "Addresses" project. To make this work, the User control passes the User object down to the addresses control, however, as the User that's been passed belongs to MyModel1 and not MyModel2, another User object has to be loaded up, then it can be used. This isn't ideal as I've had to load up the User twice. Is there a way of say, MyModel2 extending MyModel1, which effectively just adds a relationship to "User". Or is there an ORM that would handle this better? Or even a design pattern that would handle this better?

  Read the article

• is it safe to refactor my django models?

  - by Johnd

  My model is similar to this. Is this ok or should I make the common base class abstract? What are the differcenes between this or makeing it abstract and not having an extra table? It seems odd that there is only one primary key now that I have factored stuff out. class Input(models.Model): details = models.CharField(max_length=1000) user = models.ForeignKey(User) pub_date = models.DateTimeField('date published') rating = models.IntegerField() def __unicode__(self): return self.details class Case(Input): title = models.CharField(max_length=200) views = models.IntegerField() class Argument(Input): case = models.ForeignKey(Case) side = models.BooleanField() is this ok to factor stuff out intpu Input? I noticed Cases and Arguments share a primary Key. like this: CREATE TABLE "cases_input" ( "id" integer NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY, "details" varchar(1000) NOT NULL, "user_id" integer NOT NULL REFERENCES "auth_user" ("id"), "pub_date" datetime NOT NULL, "rating" integer NOT NULL ) ; CREATE TABLE "cases_case" ( "input_ptr_id" integer NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY REFERENCES "cases_input" ("id"), "title" varchar(200) NOT NULL, "views" integer NOT NULL ) ; CREATE TABLE "cases_argument" ( "input_ptr_id" integer NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY REFERENCES "cases_input" ("id"), "case_id" integer NOT NULL REFERENCES "cases_case" ("input_ptr_id"), "side" bool NOT NULL )

  Read the article

• filter queryset based on list, including None

  - by jujule

  Hi all I dont know if its a django bug or a feature but i have a strange ORM behaviour with MySQL. class Status(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length = 50) class Article(models.Model) status = models.ForeignKey(status, blank = True, null=True) filters = Q(status__in =[0, 1,2] ) | Q(status=None) items = Article.objects.filter(filters) this returns Article items but some have other status than requested [0,1,2,None] looking at the sql query : SELECT [..] FROM `app_article` LEFT OUTER JOIN `app_status` ON (`app_article`.`status_id` = `app_status`.`id`) WHERE (`app_article`.`status_id` IN (1, 2) OR `app_status`.`id` IS NULL) ORDER BY [...] the OR app_status.id IS NULL part seems to be the cause. if i change it to OR app_article.status_id IS NULL it works correctly. How to deal with this ? Thanx.

  Read the article

• Access uploaded file in JSON encoded data

  - by okello

  I've encoded my form data into JSON. This has been achieved by the following ExtJS store configuration: Ext.define('XXX.store.Registration', { extend: 'Ext.data.Store', model: 'XXX.model.Registration', autoLoad: true, pageSize: 15, autoLoad: { start: 0, limit: 15 }, proxy: { type: 'ajax', api: { create: './server/registration/create.php', read: './server/registration/get.php', update: './server/registration/update.php', destroy: './server/registration/destroy.php' }, reader: { type: 'json', root: 'registrations', successProperty: 'success' }, writer: { type: 'json', writeAllFields: true, encode: true, root: 'registrations' } } }); My server side code has been implemented in PHP. I can access the encoded form fields by using the field name as a key, as exemplified below: $reg = $_REQUEST['registrations']; $data = json_decode(stripslashes($reg)); $registerNum = $data->registerNum; $folioNum = $data->folioNum; One of the fields in my form is a fileuploadfield. How can I access the uploaded file from the uploaded JSON. Any assistance will be highly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Eclipse UML plugin?

  - by Yatendra Goel

  I want a UML modelling tool, preferably as an eclipse plugin that can perform the following: model UML diagrams Generate stub java code from the diagrams

  Read the article

• Singleton wrapper for Context

  - by kpdvx

  I'm considering creating a singleton wrapper for a Context so my model objects, if necessary, can open and read from a database connection. My model objects do not have access to a Context, and I'd like to avoid needing to pass a reference to a Context from object to object. I was planning to place into this singleton a reference to the Context returned by Application.getApplicationContext(). This singleton object would be initialized in my custom Application instance before anything else would need to or have a chance to use it. Can anyone think of a reason to not do this?

  Read the article

• get foreign key objects in a single query - Django

  - by John

  Hi I have 2 models in my django code: class ModelA(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=255) description = models.CharField(max_length=255) created_by = models.ForeignKey(User) class ModelB(models.Model): category = models.CharField(max_length=255) modela_link = models.ForeignKey(ModelA, 'modelb_link') functions = models.CharField(max_length=255) created_by = models.ForeignKey(User) Say ModelA has 100 records, all of which may or may not have links to ModelB Now say I want to get a list of every ModelA record along with the data from ModelB I would do: list_a = ModelA.objects.all() Then to get the data for ModelB I would have to do for i in list_a: i.additional_data = i.modelb_link.all() However this runs a query on every instance of i. Thus making 101 queries to run. Is there any way of running this all in just 1 query. Or at least less than the 101 queries. I've tried putting in ModelA.objects.select_related().all() but this didn't seem to have any effect. Thanks

  Read the article

• What is the proper way to check the previous value of a field before saving an object? (Using Django

  - by anonymous coward

  I have a Django Model with updated_by and an approved_by fields, both are ForeignKey fields to the built-in (auth) User models. I am aware that with updated_by, it's easy enough to simply over-ride the .save() method on the Model, and shove the request.user in that field before saving. However, for approved_by, this field should only ever be filled in when a related field (date_approved) is first filled in. I'm somewhat certain that I can check this logically, and fill in the field if the previous value was empty. What is the proper way to check the previous value of a field before saving an object? I do not anticipate that date_approved will ever be changed or updated, nor should there be any reason to ever update the approved_by entry. UPDATE: Regarding forms/validation, I should have mentioned that none of the fields in question are seen by or editable by users of the site. If I have misunderstood, I'm sorry, but I'm not sure how forms and validation apply to my question.

  Read the article

• Handling file upload in a non-blocking manner

  - by Kaliyug Antagonist

  The background thread is here Just to make objective clear - the user will upload a large file and must be redirected immediately to another page for proceeding different operations. But the file being large, will take time to be read from the controller's InputStream. So I unwillingly decided to fork a new Thread to handle this I/O. The code is as follows : The controller servlet /** * @see HttpServlet#doPost(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse * response) */ protected void doPost(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response) throws ServletException, IOException { // TODO Auto-generated method stub System.out.println("In Controller.doPost(...)"); TempModel tempModel = new TempModel(); tempModel.uploadSegYFile(request, response); System.out.println("Forwarding to Accepted.jsp"); /*try { Thread.sleep(1000 * 60); } catch (InterruptedException e) { // TODO Auto-generated catch block e.printStackTrace(); }*/ request.getRequestDispatcher("/jsp/Accepted.jsp").forward(request, response); } The model class package com.model; import java.io.IOException; import java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException; import java.util.concurrent.Future; import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest; import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletResponse; import com.utils.ProcessUtils; public class TempModel { public void uploadSegYFile(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response) { // TODO Auto-generated method stub System.out.println("In TempModel.uploadSegYFile(...)"); /* * Trigger the upload/processing code in a thread, return immediately * and notify when the thread completes */ try { FileUploaderRunnable fileUploadRunnable = new FileUploaderRunnable( request.getInputStream()); /* * Future<FileUploaderRunnable> future = ProcessUtils.submitTask( * fileUploadRunnable, fileUploadRunnable); * * FileUploaderRunnable processed = future.get(); * * System.out.println("Is file uploaded : " + * processed.isFileUploaded()); */ Thread uploadThread = new Thread(fileUploadRunnable); uploadThread.start(); } catch (IOException e) { // TODO Auto-generated catch block e.printStackTrace(); } /* * catch (InterruptedException e) { // TODO Auto-generated catch block * e.printStackTrace(); } catch (ExecutionException e) { // TODO * Auto-generated catch block e.printStackTrace(); } */ System.out.println("Returning from TempModel.uploadSegYFile(...)"); } } The Runnable package com.model; import java.io.File; import java.io.FileInputStream; import java.io.FileNotFoundException; import java.io.FileOutputStream; import java.io.IOException; import java.io.InputStream; import java.nio.ByteBuffer; import java.nio.channels.Channels; import java.nio.channels.ReadableByteChannel; public class FileUploaderRunnable implements Runnable { private boolean isFileUploaded = false; private InputStream inputStream = null; public FileUploaderRunnable(InputStream inputStream) { // TODO Auto-generated constructor stub this.inputStream = inputStream; } public void run() { // TODO Auto-generated method stub /* Read from InputStream. If success, set isFileUploaded = true */ System.out.println("Starting upload in a thread"); File outputFile = new File("D:/06c01_output.seg");/* * This will be changed * later */ FileOutputStream fos; ReadableByteChannel readable = Channels.newChannel(inputStream); ByteBuffer buffer = ByteBuffer.allocate(1000000); try { fos = new FileOutputStream(outputFile); while (readable.read(buffer) != -1) { fos.write(buffer.array()); buffer.clear(); } fos.flush(); fos.close(); readable.close(); } catch (FileNotFoundException e) { // TODO Auto-generated catch block e.printStackTrace(); } catch (IOException e) { // TODO Auto-generated catch block e.printStackTrace(); } System.out.println("File upload thread completed"); } public boolean isFileUploaded() { return isFileUploaded; } } My queries/doubts : Spawning threads manually from the Servlet makes sense to me logically but scares me coding wise - the container isn't aware of these threads after all(I think so!) The current code is giving an Exception which is quite obvious - the stream is inaccessible as the doPost(...) method returns before the run() method completes : In Controller.doPost(...) In TempModel.uploadSegYFile(...) Returning from TempModel.uploadSegYFile(...) Forwarding to Accepted.jsp Starting upload in a thread Exception in thread "Thread-4" java.lang.NullPointerException at org.apache.coyote.http11.InternalInputBuffer.fill(InternalInputBuffer.java:512) at org.apache.coyote.http11.InternalInputBuffer.fill(InternalInputBuffer.java:497) at org.apache.coyote.http11.InternalInputBuffer$InputStreamInputBuffer.doRead(InternalInputBuffer.java:559) at org.apache.coyote.http11.AbstractInputBuffer.doRead(AbstractInputBuffer.java:324) at org.apache.coyote.Request.doRead(Request.java:422) at org.apache.catalina.connector.InputBuffer.realReadBytes(InputBuffer.java:287) at org.apache.tomcat.util.buf.ByteChunk.substract(ByteChunk.java:407) at org.apache.catalina.connector.InputBuffer.read(InputBuffer.java:310) at org.apache.catalina.connector.CoyoteInputStream.read(CoyoteInputStream.java:202) at java.nio.channels.Channels$ReadableByteChannelImpl.read(Unknown Source) at com.model.FileUploaderRunnable.run(FileUploaderRunnable.java:39) at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source) Keeping in mind the point 1., does the use of Executor framework help me in anyway ? package com.utils; import java.util.concurrent.Future; import java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor; public final class ProcessUtils { /* Ensure that no more than 2 uploads,processing req. are allowed */ private static final ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor threadPoolExec = new ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor( 2); public static <T> Future<T> submitTask(Runnable task, T result) { return threadPoolExec.submit(task, result); } } So how should I ensure that the user doesn't block and the stream remains accessible so that the (uploaded)file can be read from it?

  Read the article

• Rails Authlogic authentication method

  - by Rabbott

  Within Authlogic, is there a way that I can add conditions to the authentication method? I know by using the find_by_login_method I can specify another method to use, but when I use this I need to pass another parameter since the find_by_login_method method only passes the parameter that is deemed the 'login_field'. What I need to do is check something that is an association of the authentic model.. Here is the method I want to use # make sure that the user has access to the subdomain that they are # attempting to login to, subdomains are company names def self.find_by_email_and_company(email, company) user = User.find_by_email(email) companies = [] user.brands.each do |b| companies << b.company.id end user && companies.include?(company) end But this fails due to the fact that only one parameter is sent to the find_by_email_and_company method. The company is actually the subdomain, so in order to get it here I am just placing it in a hidden field in the form (only way I could think to get it to the model) Is there a method I can override somehow..?

  Read the article

• How can I traverse a reverse generic relation in a Django template?

  - by user569139

  I have the following class that I am using to bookmark items: class BookmarkedItem(models.Model): is_bookmarked = models.BooleanField(default=False) user = models.ForeignKey(User) content_type = models.ForeignKey(ContentType) object_id = models.PositiveIntegerField() content_object = generic.GenericForeignKey() And I am defining a reverse generic relationship as follows: class Link(models.Model): url = models.URLField() bookmarks = generic.GenericRelation(BookmarkedItem) In one of my views I generate a queryset of all links and add this to a context: links = Link.objects.all() context = { 'links': links } return render_to_response('links.html', context) The problem I am having is how to traverse the generic relationship in my template. For each link I want to be able to check the is_bookmarked attribute and change the add/remove bookmark button according to whether the user already has it bookmarked or not. Is this possible to do in the template? Or do I have to do some additional filtering in the view and pass another queryset?

  Read the article

• Rails - inheritance hierarchy of classes where a subtype can play two roles

  - by Miquel

  I need to model Owners and Rentees in an application, so you have stuff that is always owned by someone and can be rented for someone else. I first approached this problem with Single Table Inheritance because both types of person will share all attributes, so you would have a model called Person associated to a table people with Owner and Rentee inheriting from Person. The problem is that Single type inheritance discerns subtypes using a field type and therefore a record in the table can represent either an Owner or a Rentee but not both at the same time, while in the real context you can have an Owner which is renting something from another Owner and therefore that person is at the same time an Owner and a Rentee. How would you approach this problem? Would you use separated tables for owners and rentees? Is there any other type of table inheritance in Rails?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222  | Next Page >