I am trying to update a query in AWS Dynamo using AWS Amplify on top of Next.js.
My scenario is simple.
On page load, if there exists a user and the user has not visited a page before, a new object will be created with set values using SWR.
const fetchUserSite = async (owner, code) => {
try {
// Create site object if no site exists
if (userData == null) {
const siteInfo = {
id: uuidv4(),
code: parkCode,
owner: user?.username,
bookmarked: false,
visited: false,
}
await API.graphql({
query: createSite,
variables: {input: siteInfo},
authMode: 'AMAZON_COGNITO_USER_POOLS',
})
console.log(`${code} added for the first time`)
}
return userData || null
} catch (err) {
console.log('Site not added by user', data, err)
}
}
// Only call the fetchUserSite method if `user` exists
const {data} = useSWR(user ? [user?.username, parkCode] : null, fetchUserSite)
Currently, this works. The object is added to the database with the above attributes. HOWEVER, when I click a button to update this newly created object, I get an error of path: null, locations: (1) […], message: "Variable 'input' has coerced Null value for NonNull type 'ID!'"
This is my call to update the object when I click a button with the onClick handler "handleDBQuery".
const handleDBQuery = async () => {
await API.graphql({
query: updateSite,
variables: {
input: {
id: data?.id,
bookmarked: true,
owner: user?.username,
},
},
authMode: 'AMAZON_COGNITO_USER_POOLS',
})
console.log(`${name} Bookmarked`)
}
My hunch is that the updateSite query does not know about the createSite query on page load.
In short, how can I update an item after I just created it?
I looked into the code at master branch and follow along as you describe. I found that the data?.id here comes from a state variable and it is set only before the call to createSite. I suggest you try setId again using the data returned from the createSite
Try this
const fetchUserSite = async (owner, code) => {
try {
// Create site object if no site exists
if (userData == null) {
const siteInfo = {
id: uuidv4(),
code: parkCode,
owner: user?.username,
bookmarked: false,
visited: false,
}
const { data: newData } = await API.graphql({
query: createSite,
variables: {input: siteInfo},
authMode: 'AMAZON_COGNITO_USER_POOLS',
});
setId(newData.id); // <====== here (or setId(siteInfo.id))
console.log(`${code} added for the first time`)
return newData; // <======= and this, maybe? (you may have to modify the qraphql query to make it return the same item as in the listSite
}
return userData || null
} catch (err) {
console.log('Site not added by user', data, err)
}
}
Related
I have two databases that I need to interact with in my code. I have a simple function that takes an object and writes it to my PostgreSQL database using Prisma. I've tested the function with Postman, and it works perfectly, but when I try to execute it using a Jest mock (using the singleton pattern found in the Prisma unit testing guide), it returns undefined indicating that it didn't interact with the database and create the new record. Here's my code:
/prisma/clinical-schema.prisma
generator client {
provider = "prisma-client-js"
output = "./generated/clinical"
}
datasource clinicalDatabase {
provider = "postgresql"
url = "postgresql://postgres:postgres#localhost:5432/clinical-data?schema=public"
}
model pcc_webhook_update {
id Int #id #default(autoincrement())
event_type String
organization_id Int
facility_id Int
patient_id Int
resource_id String?
webhook_date DateTime #default(now()) #clinicalDatabase.Timestamptz(6)
status pcc_webhook_update_status #default(pending)
status_changed_date DateTime? #clinicalDatabase.Timestamptz(6)
error_count Int #default(0)
##unique([organization_id, facility_id, patient_id, resource_id, event_type, status])
}
enum pcc_webhook_update_status {
pending
processing
processed
error
}
/prisma/clinical-client.ts
import { PrismaClient } from './generated/clinical';
const prismaClinical = new PrismaClient();
export default prismaClinical;
/testing/prisma-clinical-mock.ts
import { PrismaClient } from '../prisma/generated/clinical';
import { mockDeep, mockReset, DeepMockProxy } from 'jest-mock-extended';
import prisma from '../prisma/clinical-client';
jest.mock('../prisma/clinical-client', () => ({
__esModule: true,
default: mockDeep<PrismaClient>()
}));
beforeEach(() => {
mockReset(prismaClinicalMock);
});
export const prismaClinicalMock = prisma as unknown as DeepMockProxy<PrismaClient>;
Everything up to this point follows the conventions outlined by the Prisma unit testing docs. The only modification I made was to make it database specific. Below is my function and tests. The request object in handle-pcc-webhooks.ts is a sample http request object, the body of which contains the webhook data I care about.
/functions/handle-pcc-webhooks/handler.ts
import prismaClinical from '../../../prisma/clinical-client';
import { pcc_webhook_update } from '../../../prisma/generated/clinical';
import { requestObject } from './handler.types';
export const handlePccWebhook = async (request: requestObject) => {
try {
const webhook = JSON.parse(request.body);
// if the webhook doesn't include a resource id array, set it to an array with an empty string to ensure processing and avoid violating
// the multi-column unique constraint on the table
const { resourceId: resourceIds = [''] } = webhook;
let records = [];
for (const resourceId of resourceIds) {
// update an existing record if one exists in the pending state, otherwise create a new entry
const record: pcc_webhook_update = await prismaClinical.pcc_webhook_update.upsert({
where: {
organization_id_facility_id_patient_id_resource_id_event_type_status: {
organization_id: webhook.orgId,
facility_id: webhook.facId,
patient_id: webhook.patientId,
resource_id: resourceId,
event_type: webhook.eventType,
status: 'pending'
}
},
update: {
webhook_date: new Date()
},
create: {
event_type: webhook.eventType,
organization_id: webhook.orgId,
facility_id: webhook.facId,
patient_id: webhook.patientId,
resource_id: resourceId,
status: 'pending' // not needed
}
});
records.push(record);
}
return records;
} catch (error) {
console.error(error);
}
};
/functions/handle-pcc-webhooks/handler.spec.ts
import fs from 'fs';
import path from 'path';
import MockDate from 'mockdate';
import { prismaClinicalMock } from '../../../testing/prisma-clinical-mock';
import { createAllergyAddRecord } from './__mocks__/allergy';
import { requestObject } from './handler.types';
import { handlePccWebhook } from './handler';
describe('allergy.add', () => {
let requestObject: requestObject;
let allergyAddRecord: any;
beforeAll(() => {
requestObject = getRequestObject('allergy.add');
});
beforeEach(() => {
MockDate.set(new Date('1/1/2022'));
allergyAddRecord = createAllergyAddRecord(new Date());
});
afterEach(() => {
MockDate.reset();
});
test('should create an allergy.add database entry', async() => {
prismaClinicalMock.pcc_webhook_update.create.mockResolvedValue(allergyAddRecord);
// this is where I would expect handlePccWebhook to return the newly created database
// record, but instead it returns undefined. If I run the function outside of this
// unit test, with the same input value, it functions perfectly
await expect(handlePccWebhook(requestObject)).resolves.toEqual([allergyAddRecord]);
});
});
// This just builds a request object with the current webhook being tested
function getRequestObject(webhookType: string) {
// read the contents of request object file as a buffer, then convert it to JSON
const rawRequestObject = fs.readFileSync(path.resolve(__dirname, '../../sample-data/handle-pcc-webhook-request.json'));
const requestObject: requestObject = JSON.parse(rawRequestObject.toString());
// read the contents of the webhook file as a buffer, then convert it to a string
const rawWebhook = fs.readFileSync(path.resolve(__dirname, `../../sample-data/${webhookType}.json`));
const webhookString = rawWebhook.toString();
// set the body of the request object to the contents of the target webhook
requestObject.body = webhookString;
return requestObject;
}
Finally, here is the result of running the unit test:
So after banging my had against the wall for a few hours, I figured out the issue. In my handler.spec.ts file, I had the following line:
prismaClinicalMock.pcc_webhook_update.create.mockResolvedValue(allergyAddRecord);
what that does is mock the value returned for any create functions run using Prisma. The issue is that my function is using an upsert function, which I wasn't explicitly mocking, thus returning undefined. I changed the above line to
prismaClinicalMock.pcc_webhook_update.upsert.mockResolvedValue(allergyAddRecord);
and it started working.
I try use pubsub in apollo server & apollo client. but subscribed data is only null.
client dependency
"#apollo/react-hooks": "^3.1.5",
"apollo-boost": "^0.4.9",
"apollo-link-ws": "^1.0.20",
"graphql": "^15.0.0",
"react": "^16.13.1",
"react-dom": "^16.13.1",
"react-router-dom": "^5.2.0",
"react-scripts": "3.4.1",
"styled-components": "^5.1.1",
"subscriptions-transport-ws": "^0.9.16",
"typescript": "~3.7.2"
server dependency
"apollo-server": "^2.14.1",
"graphql": "^15.0.0",
"merge-graphql-schemas": "^1.7.8",
"ts-node": "^8.10.2",
"tsconfig-paths": "^3.9.0",
"typescript": "^3.9.3"
// apolloClient.ts
import { ApolloClient, HttpLink, InMemoryCache, split } from 'apollo-boost'
import { WebSocketLink } from 'apollo-link-ws'
import { getMainDefinition } from 'apollo-utilities'
const wsLink = new WebSocketLink({
uri: 'ws://localhost:4000/graphql',
options: {
reconnect: true
}
})
const httpLink = new HttpLink({
uri: 'http://localhost:4000'
})
const link = split(
// split based on operation type
({ query }) => {
const definition = getMainDefinition(query);
return (
definition.kind === 'OperationDefinition' &&
definition.operation === 'subscription'
);
},
wsLink,
httpLink,
)
const cache = new InMemoryCache()
const client = new ApolloClient({
cache: cache,
link: link,
})
export default client
// subscribe.ts
const ON_PUT_UNIT = gql`
subscription onPutUnit($code: String!) {
onPutUnit(code: $code)
}
`
const onPutResult = useSubscription(
ON_PUT_UNIT,
{ variables: {
code: code,
}}
)
// in is only null!!
console.log('subscribe', onPutResult)
-server-
onPutUnit.ts
type Subscription {
onPutUnit(code: String!): Room
}
import { pubsub } from '#src/index'
const { withFilter } = require('apollo-server')
export default {
Subscription: {
onPutUnit: {
subscribe: withFilter(
() => pubsub.asyncIterator(['PUT_UNIT']),
(payload: any, variables: any) => {
// no problem in payload & variable data
return payload.code === variables.code
}
)
}
},
}
putUnit.ts
type Mutation {
putUnit(code: String!, x: Int!, y: Int!, userName: String!): Room!
}
export default {
Mutation: {
putUnit: async (_: any, args: args) => {
const { code, x, y, userName } = args
const room = findRoom(code)
console.log(room) // no problem. normal data.
pubsub.publish('PUT_UNIT', room)
return room
},
},
}
Is it some problem? subscribe event is normally reached to client when publish. but data is is only null. I can't fine the reason.
You only specified a subscribe function for onPutUnit, without specifying a resolve function. That means the field utilizes the default resolver.
The default resolver just looks for a property with the same name as the field on the parent object (the first parameter passed to the resolver) and returns that. If there is no property on the parent object with the same name as the field, then the field resolves to null. The parent object is the value the parent field resolved to. For example, if we have a query like this:
{
user {
name
}
}
whatever the resolver for user returns will be the parent value provided to the resolver for name (if user returns a Promise, it's whatever the Promise resolved to).
But what about user? It has no parent field because it's a root field. In this case, user is passed the rootValue you set when initializing the ApolloServer (or {} if you didn't).
With subscriptions, this works a bit differently because whatever value you publish is actually passed to the resolver as the root value. That means you can take advantage of the default resolver by publishing an object with a property that matches the field name:
pubsub.publish('PUT_UNIT', { onPutUnit: ... })
if you don't do that, though, you'll need to provide a resolve function that transforms the payload you published. For example, if we do:
pubsub.publish('PUT_UNIT', 'FOOBAR')
Then our resolver map needs to look something like this:
const resolvers = {
Subscription: {
onPutUnit: {
subscribe: ...,
resolve: (root) => {
console.log(root) // 'FOOBAR'
// return whatever you want onPutUnit to resolve to
}
}
},
}
I have a mutation to create a new card object, and I expect it should be added to the user interface after update. Cache, Apollo Chrome tool, and console logging reflect the changes, but the UI does not without a manual reload.
const [createCard, { loading, error }] = useMutation(CREATE_CARD, {
update(cache, { data: { createCard } }) {
let localData = cache.readQuery({
query: CARDS_QUERY,
variables: { id: deckId }
});
localData.deck.cards = [...localData.deck.cards, createCard];
;
client.writeQuery({
query: CARDS_QUERY,
variables: { id: parseInt(localData.deck.id, 10) },
data: { ...localData }
});
I have changed cache.writeQuery to client.writeQuery, but that didn't solve the problem.
For reference, here is the Query I am running...
const CARDS_QUERY = gql`
query CardsQuery($id: ID!) {
deck(id: $id) {
id
deckName
user {
id
}
cards {
id
front
back
pictureName
pictureUrl
createdAt
}
}
toggleDeleteSuccess #client
}
`;
I managed the same result without the cloneDeep method. Just using the spread operator solved my problem.
const update = (cache, {data}) => {
const queryData = cache.readQuery({query: USER_QUERY})
const cartItemId = data.cartItem.id
queryData.me.cart = queryData.me.cart.filter(v => v.id !== cartItemId)
cache.writeQuery({query: USER_QUERY, data: {...queryData}})
}
Hope this helps someone else.
Ok, finally ran into a long Github thread discussing their solutions for the same issue. The solution that ultimately worked for me was deep cloning the data object (I personally used Lodash cloneDeep), which after passing in the mutated data object to cache.writeQuery, it was finally updating the UI. Ultimately, it still seems like there ought to be a way to trigger the UI update, considering the cache reflects the changes.
Here's the after, view my original question for the before...
const [createCard, { loading, error }] = useMutation(CREATE_CARD, {
update(cache, { data: { createCard } }) {
const localData = cloneDeep( // Lodash cloneDeep to make a fresh object
cache.readQuery({
query: CARDS_QUERY,
variables: { id: deckId }
})
);
localData.deck.cards = [...localData.deck.cards, createCard]; //Push the mutation to the object
cache.writeQuery({
query: CARDS_QUERY,
variables: { id: localData.deck.id },
data: { ...localData } // Cloning ultimately triggers the UI update since writeQuery now sees a new object.
});
},
});
Quick and shortly I have following problem:
I have following two actions within a component in Ember:
createData: function(user) {
let collection = [];
for (let i = 0; i < user.posts.length; i++) {
let data = this.send('createSingleData',user.posts[i], user, 'post');
console.log(data);
collection.push(data);
}
return collection;
},
createSingleData: function(data, user, type) {
let entitySkeleton = {
name: data.place.name,
belongsTo: user.id,
position: {
data.place.location.longitude,
data.place.location.latitude
}
};
console.log(entitySkeleton);
return entitySkeleton;
}
the first log - within createSingleData, right before returning the logged value - writes the entitySkeleton as Object into the console - as expected.
However, the console.log(data) - within createData - writes 'undefined' to the console.
Is there any aspect of asynchrounosity I didn't respect?
P.S.:
I also logged any paramater within createSingleData, they are all set properly.
The variable collection also only gets pushed 'undefined'.
You cannot return the value from action, instead you can set property from the action.
how to return values from actions in emberjs
actions: {
PrintSomething: function() {
let obj = [{a: 'raj'}, {a: 'Prudvi'}, {a : 'thimappa'}]
console.log('before', obj);
this.send('returnSomething', obj);
console.log('after calling action', this.get('returnvalue'));
},
returnSomething: function(obj) {
obj.push({a: 'FSDFSDF'})
var data = obj;
this.set('returnvalue', data);
}
}
I am using Meteor.js with Amazon S3 Bucket for uploading and storing photos. I am using the meteorite packges collectionFS and aws-s3. I have setup my aws-s3 connection correctly and the images collection is working fine.
Client side event handler:
'click .submit': function(evt, templ) {
var user = Meteor.user();
var photoFile = $('#photoInput').get(0).files[0];
if(photoFile){
var readPhoto = new FileReader();
readPhoto.onload = function(event) {
photodata = event.target.result;
console.log("calling method");
Meteor.call('uploadPhoto', photodata, user);
};
}
And my server side method:
'uploadPhoto': function uploadPhoto(photodata, user) {
var tag = Random.id([10] + "jpg");
var photoObj = new FS.File({name: tag});
photoObj.attachData(photodata);
console.log("s3 method called");
Images.insert(photoObj, function (err, fileObj) {
if(err){
console.log(err, err.stack)
}else{
console.log(fileObj._id);
}
});
The file that is selected is a .jpg image file but upon upload I get this error on the server method:
Exception while invoking method 'uploadPhoto' Error: DataMan constructor received data that it doesn't support
And no matter whether I directly pass the image file, or attach it as data or use the fileReader to read as text/binary/string. I still get that error. Please advise.
Ok, maybe some thoughts. I have done things with collectionFS some months ago, so take care to the docs, because my examples maybe not 100% correct.
Credentials should be set via environment variables. So your key and secret is available on server only. Check this link for further reading.
Ok first, here is some example code which is working for me. Check yours for differences.
Template helper:
'dropped #dropzone': function(event, template) {
addImage(event);
}
Function addImage:
function addImagePreview(event) {
//Go throw each file,
FS.Utility.eachFile(event, function(file) {
//Some Validationchecks
var reader = new FileReader();
reader.onload = (function(theFile) {
return function(e) {
var fsFile = new FS.File(image.src);
//setMetadata, that is validated in collection
//just own user can update/remove fsFile
fsFile.metadata = {owner: Meteor.userId()};
PostImages.insert(fsFile, function (err, fileObj) {
if(err) {
console.log(err);
}
});
};
})(file);
// Read in the image file as a data URL.
reader.readAsDataURL(file);
});
}
Ok, your next point is the validation. The validation can be done with allow/deny rules and with a filter on the FS.Collection. This way you can do all your validation AND insert via client.
Example:
PostImages = new FS.Collection('profileImages', {
stores: [profileImagesStore],
filter: {
maxSize: 3145728,
allow: {
contentTypes: ['image/*'],
extensions: ['png', 'PNG', 'jpg', 'JPG', 'jpeg', 'JPEG']
}
},
onInvalid: function(message) {
console.log(message);
}
});
PostImages.allow({
insert: function(userId, doc) {
return (userId && doc.metadata.owner === userId);
},
update: function(userId, doc, fieldNames, modifier) {
return (userId === doc.metadata.owner);
},
remove: function(userId, doc) {
return false;
},
download: function(userId) {
return true;
},
fetch: []
});
Here you will find another example click
Another point of error is maybe your aws configuration. Have you done everything like it is written here?
Based on this post click it seems that this error occures when FS.File() is not constructed correctly. So maybe this should be you first way to start.
A lot for reading so i hope this helps you :)