Other questions on this topic are over 3 years old.
I see this documentation on serializers, which seems like the answer, but I can't get it to work. I just want a simple JSON object structure like this:
business-hours : {
monday: {
open: “24hr”,
from: <some time>,
to: <some time>
},
tuesday: {
open: “closed”,
from: <some time>,
to: <some time>
}
},
What's the move here?
Edit: as for editing keys in an empty DS.attr() field, in response to locks' request for more information. I pass this component the model:
<h3>Business Hours</h3>
{{business-hours model=model}}
And attempt to edit the model.businessHours attribute in order to create this ideal record outlined above:
{{input type="time" value=model.businessHours.friday.from}}
{{input type="time" value=model.businessHours.friday.to}}
Should this type of syntax be allowing me to form the appropriate 'subdocument' in the model? With the empty DS.attr() field?
If you want to edit these subdocuments you should use an model for this.
So for this you have two models:
/models/business-hour-week.js
import DS from 'ember-data';
export default DS.Model.extend({
monday: DS.hasMany('business-hour-day'),
tuesday: DS.hasMany('business-hour-day')
});
/models/business-hour-day
import DS from 'ember-data';
export default DS.Model.extend({
open: DS.attr('string'),
from: DS.attr('date'),
to: DS.attr('date')
});
And then use a serializer to convert your data to a valid JSONAPI Document like this:
{
data: {
type: 'business-hour-week',
id: '1',
relationshops: {
monday: {
data: {
id: '1',
open: '24hr',
from: '<some time>',
to: '<some time>',
}
},
toesday: {
data: {
id: '1',
open: 'closed',
from: '<some time>',
to: '<some time>',
}
}
}
}
}
Then you can use this and work with it as expected.
None of the above worked for me. Using a serializer to add the ids seems hackery. This is one of those things that should be easy... These are my two solutions to the problem.
This is the easiest. You can use an addon called ember fragments: https://github.com/lytics/ember-data-model-fragments. This allows you to create nested models, without forcing child records to have an id. Fragment models are set up just like normal ones, and have clean/dirty attrs.
You can set up the 2 models as described above (week/days), but you would use a belongsTo, instead of a hasMany (single record vs array of records.) You would also have to create serializers for each parent model (week, and whatever parent it lies under) and use the embedded records mixin, setting the relationship attrs to "deserialize: records, serialize: records". You just have to make sure each models response from the server has its own id in the hierarchy. If you are using Mongo/Mongoose, you can create the sub-docs by nesting child schemas, vs using object literal syntax. This way each sub-doc gets it's own id, even if it's a one-to-one relationship.
Related
I'd like to know whether it is possible to configure Ember data in a way that async hasMany relationships are loaded in a single request.
Given the following model:
// models/post.js
export default DS.Model.extend({
comments: DS.hasMany()
});
// models/comments.js
export default DS.Model.extend({
...
});
When I reference the property comments somewhere in the template or controller, it will fetch the related comments of the post one-by-one in separate requests. This results in many requests and I'd like to combine those into a single request with a filter on id-property.
There is a switch you have to enable for the desired behaviour called coalesceFindRequests: true that you can set in you application adapter like so:
// adapters/application.js
import DS from 'ember-data';
export default DS.RESTAdapter.extend({
coalesceFindRequests: true,
});
Now Ember will fetch multiple records of known id via ..api/comments?ids[]=1&ids[]=2
I suppose it'll be the same for a JSONAdapter.
Yes, you should use link relationships:
Instead of this:
relationships: {
commend: {
data: [
{ id: '1', type: 'comment' },
{ id: '2', type: 'comment' }
]
}
}
do this:
relationships: {
comments: {
links: {
related: 'http://example.com/post/A/comments'
}
}
}
The nice thing about this is that you can 100% adjust this in your backend.
This is a similar question to this one, except this is for the latest versions of Ember and Active Model Serializers (0.10.2).
I have a simple Parent:Child relationship.
app/models/trail.js
import Ember from 'ember';
import DS from 'ember-data';
export default DS.Model.extend({
name: DS.attr(),
// relationships
employees: DS.hasMany('employee', { async: true }),
});
app/models/employee.js
import DS from 'ember-data';
import Person from '../models/person';
export default Person.extend({
status: DS.attr(),
statusCode: DS.attr(),
});
app/models/person.js
import Ember from 'ember';
import DS from 'ember-data';
export default DS.Model.extend({
avatarUrl: DS.attr(),
firstName: DS.attr(),
lastName: DS.attr(),
fullName: Ember.computed('firstName', 'lastName', function() {
return `${this.get('lastName')}, ${this.get('firstName')}`;
}),
});
When I create a new Trail, and select two employees for the 'hasMany', the following json arrives the server (from the Rails log):
{"data":
{"attributes":
{"name":"TEST3",
"gpx-file-url":"a url",
"distance-value":"5"},
"relationships":
{"employees":{"data":[]}}, "type":"trails"}}
My question is, what has happened to the employees? Where are the id's of the employees (they already exist both in the database and in the Ember Store - ie, I am not trying to create child records in this request).
EDIT
I just found this question, which explains that the id's for a hasMany relationship are not sent by Ember's JSONAPISerializer to the API - since the foreign key here actually has to be persisted in each child record. So essentially by 'selecting' employees, you need to save the fact that they now have a parent. So the selected employee records need to be persisted.
But my understanding was that this all works "out of the box" and that Ember would automatically fire a POST request to do this, but that seems to not be the case.
This then gets to the real question - how do I update those children?
UPDATE - BOUNTY ADDED AS THIS HAS QUESTION HAS EVOLVED
After further analysis, it became clear that a new model was required - Assignments. So now the problem is more complex.
Model structure is now this:
Trail
hasMany assignments
Employee
hasMany assignments
Assignment
belongsTo Trail
belongsTo Employee
In my 'new Trail' route, I use the fantastic ember-power-select to let the user select employees. On clicking 'save' I plan to iterate through the selected employees and then create the assignment records (and obviously save them, either before or after saving the Trail itself, not sure which is best yet).
The problem is still, however, that I don't know how to do that - how to get at the 'selected' employees and then iterate through them to create the assignments.
So, here is the relevant EPS usage in my template:
in /app/templates/trails/new.hbs
{{#power-select-multiple options=model.currentEmployees
searchPlaceholder="Type a name to search"
searchField="fullName"
selected=staff placeholder="Select team member(s)"
onchange=(route-action 'staffSelected') as |employee|
}}
<block here template to display various employee data, not just 'fullName'/>
{{/power-select-multiple}}
(route-action is a helper from Dockyard that just automatically sends the action to my route, works great)
Here is my model:
model: function () {
let myFilter = {};
myFilter.data = { filter: {status: [2,3] } }; // current employees
return Ember.RSVP.hash({
trail: this.store.createRecord('trail'),
currentEmployees: this.store.query('employee', myFilter).then(function(data) {return data}),
});
},
actions: {
staffSelected (employee) {
this.controller.get('staff').pushObject(employee);
console.log(this.controller.get('staff').length);
},
}
I only discovered today that we still need controllers, so this could be my problem! Here it is:
import Ember from 'ember';
export default Ember.Controller.extend({
staff: [] <- I guess this needs to be something more complicated
});
This works and I see one object is added to the array in the console. But then the EPS refuses to work because I get this error in the console:
trekclient.js:91 Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property 'toString' of undefined(anonymous function) # trekclient.js:91ComputedPropertyPrototype.get # vendor.js:29285get #
etc....
Which is immediately follow by this:
vendor.js:16695 DEPRECATION: You modified (-join-classes (-normalize-class "concatenatedTriggerClasses" concatenatedTriggerClasses) "ember-view" "ember-basic-dropdown-trigger" (-normalize-class "inPlaceClass" inPlaceClass activeClass=undefined inactiveClass=undefined) (-normalize-class "hPositionClass" hPositionClass activeClass=undefined inactiveClass=undefined) (-normalize-class "vPositionClass" vPositionClass activeClass=undefined inactiveClass=undefined)) twice in a single render. This was unreliable in Ember 1.x and will be removed in Ember 3.0 [deprecation id: ember-views.render-double-modify]
So I imagine this is because the examples in the documentation just uses an array containing strings, not actual Ember.Objects. But I have no clue how to solve this.
So, I decided to throw away the controller (ha ha) and get creative.
What if I added a property to the Trail model? This property can basically be a 'dummy' property that collected the selected employees.
in /app/models/trail.js
selectedEmps: DS.hasMany('employee', async {false})
I set async to false since we will not persist them and before saving the new Trail I can just set this to null again.
in /app/templates/trails/new.js
{{#power-select-multiple options=model.currentEmployees
searchPlaceholder="Type a name to search"
searchField="fullName"
selected=model.selectedEmps placeholder="Select team member(s)"
onchange=(action (mut model.selectedEmps)) as |employee|
}}
<block here again/>
{{/power-select-multiple}}
This works, it doesn't 'blow up' after selecting the first employee. I can select multiple and delete them from the template. The control seems to work fine, as it is mutating 'model.selectedEmps' directly.
Now, I think this is a hack because I have two problems with it:
If I change the 'mut' to an action, so I can add further logic, I
cannot figure out how to access what is actually stored in the
propery 'model.selectedEmps'
Even if I can figure out (1) I will have to always make sure that
'selectedEmps' is emptied when leaving this route, otherwise the
next time this route is entered, it will remember what was
selected before (since they are now in the Ember.Store)
The fundamental issue is that I can live with 'mut' but still have the problem that when the user hits 'Save' I have to figure out which employees were selected, so I can create the assignments for them.
But I cannot figure out how to access what is selected. Maybe something this Spaghetti-Monster-awful mess:
save: function (newObj) {
console.log(newObj.get('selectedEmps'));
if (newObj.get('isValid')) {
let emp = this.get('store').createRecord('assignment', {
trail: newObj,
person: newObj.get('selectedEmps')[0]
})
newObj.save().then( function (newTrail) {
emp.save();
//newTrail.get('selectedEmps')
// this.transitionTo('trails');
console.log('DONE');
});
}
else {
alert("Not valid - please provide a name and a GPX file.");
}
},
So there are two problems to solve:
How to get the selected employees, iterate and create the
assignments.
How to then save the results to the API (JSON-API using Rails). I
presume that newObj.save and each assignment.save will take care
of that.
UPDATE
The developer of EPS kindly pointed out that the action handler receives an array, since I changed to using a multiple select, not a single select as it had been earlier. So the action is receiving the full array of what is currently selected. DOH!
I was thus able to update the action handler as follows, which now successfully stores the currently selected employees in the staff property of the controller. One step closer.
staffSelected(newList) {
existing.forEach(function(me){
if (!newList.includes(me)) {
existing.removeObject(me); // if I exist but the newList doesn't have me, remove me
}
});
newList.forEach(function(me){
if (!existing.includes(me)) {
existing.pushObject(me); // if I don't exist but the newList has me, add me
}
});
}
Perhaps not the best way to intersect 2 arrays but that's the least of my concerns at 4am on a Saturday night. :(
FINAL PROBLEM UPDATE - how to save the data?
Ok, so now that I can get the selected employees, I can create assignments, but still cannot figure out what Ember requires for me to save them, this save action throws an error:
save: function (newObject) {
if (newObject.get('isValid')) {
let theChosenOnes = this.controller.get('theChosenOnes');
let _store = this.get('store');
theChosenOnes.forEach(function (aChosenOne) {
_store.createRecord('assignment', {
trail: newObject,
person: aChosenOne,
});
});
newObject.save().then(function (newTrail) {
newTrail.get('assignments').save().then(function() {
console.log('DONE');
});
});
}
get(...).save is not a function
The problem with your final update is that in Ember Data 2.x, relationships are asynchronous by default, so what's returned from newTrail.get('assignments') is not a DS.ManyArray, which has a .save, but a PromiseArray, which doesn't have that.
You need a small tweak to do this instead, so you call .save on the resolved relationship:
newObject.save().then(function (newTrail) {
newTrail.get('assignments').then(assignments => assignments.save()).then(function() {
console.log('DONE');
});
});
My ember app is not sending my foreign key to the back-end.
I have a table called issues which is has a related table called categories
My model is:
import DS from 'ember-data';
export default DS.Model.extend({
name: DS.attr('string'),
category_id: DS.belongsTo('category'),
description: DS.attr('string')
});
My route is:
import Ember from 'ember';
export default Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(){
return this.store.findAll('issue');
},
actions: {
create: function(){
var issue = this.store.createRecord('issue');
issue.name = this.get('controller').get('newName');
issue.description = this.get('controller').get('newDescription');
issue.category_id = parseInt(this.get('controller').get('newCategory'));
//debugger;
console.log(issue);
issue.save();
},
...
other actions
...
}
}
});
the console.log from above looks like the category_id is getting set correctly:
category_id: 3
description: "foobar"
name: "test"
However my JSON payload that gets sent to the backend looks like:
{"issue":{"name":"test","description":"foobar","category_id":null}}
I tried stepping through by adding a custom serialiser in app/serializers/application.js
export default DS.RESTSerializer.extend({
...
serialize: function(snapshot,options){
console.debug('options='+options);
debugger;
var json = this._super(snapshot, options);;
return json;
}
...
});
But I got lost in all the super calling super indirection.
The snapshot.record has category_id: 3, but the json coming back from the this._super() call has category_id: null
options has includeID:true
Any clues will be much appreciated ...
Ember : 2.0.2
Ember Data : 2.0.0
Your model definition is wrong, when dealing with relationships you define them just as you would define any other attribute, there is no need to use _id.
export default DS.Model.extend({
name: DS.attr('string'),
category: DS.belongsTo('category'),
description: DS.attr('string')
});
As for the creation you should always use setters/getters when dealing with ember objects:
create: function() {
var issue = this.store.createRecord('issue', {
name: this.get('controller').get('newName'),
description: this.get('controller').get('newDescription'),
category: this.get('controller').get('newCategory') // assuming new category is a DS.Model instance of category
});
issue.save();
}
If you wish to stick to the syntax you have you would use issue.set('name', this.get('controller').get('newName')), from the looks of your code it seems you are going about this in the wrong way.
You should have a this.route('new') nested under your issues route, that way you wouldn't have to use the controller to store information.
You would simply set the model of the new route to:
model: function() {
return this.store.createRecord('issue');
}
Your template would make use of the input helpers like so:
{{input value=model.name}} and your action would just get the currentModel and call .save().
I'm trying to save a change to a parent model on a child model in Ember to my server, but for some reason the REST Payload doesn't contain the belongsTo Relationship
My 2 models are defined like this:
parent.js
import DS from 'ember-data';
export default DS.Model.extend({
parentName: DS.attr('string')
});
child.js
import DS from 'ember-data';
export default DS.Model.extend({
childName: DS.attr('string'),
parent: DS.belongsTo('parent')
});
when I change the belongsTo to a different parent for a childModel by editing and saving an existing record. Somehow my payload doesnt include the parent model.
For example.
I have a child like this:
{
id: 1,
parent: 1,
childName: "Child 1"
}
and in code I do this:
childModel.set('parent', parentModel); // this is a different parentModel, one with id: 2
I would expect the payload to look something like this:
HTTP-PUT: http://server/child/1
{
id: 1,
parent: 2,
childName: "Child 1"
}
however, in reality, the payload is this:
HTTP-PUT: http://server/child/1
{
id: 1,
childName: "Child 1"
}
What goes wrong here? Why is the parent relationship missing from the payload?
Some extra information:
Ember v2.0.1
Ember-data v2.0.0
Relationships must be async: true (which is the default)
I'm using a standard DS.JSONAPISerializer in combination with the DS.RestAdapter
Turns out during the serialization, I only extracted the attributes hash from my JSON Api - JSON, Obviously I need to look for relationships in the relationships hash.
Does anyone know of a way to specify for an Ember model an attribute which is not persisted?
Basically, we're loading some metadata related to each model and sending that data to Ember via the RESTAdapter within the model. This metadata can be changed in our app, but is done via using an AJAX call. Once the call succeeds, I want to be able to update this value within the model without Ember sticking its nose in this business by changing the model to the uncommitted and doing whatever it does with transactions behind the scenes.
I also have the problem that this metadata, which is not data from the model's database record, is passed by the RESTAdapter back to the server, which doesn't expect these values. I am using a RoR backend, so the server errors out trying to mass-assign protected attributes which aren't meant to be attributes at all. I know I can scrub the data received on the server, but I would prefer the client to be able to distinguish between persistent data and auxiliary data.
So, to the original question: is there any alternative to Ember-Data's DS.attr('...') which will specify a non-persistent attribute?
The other answers to this question work with Ember data versions up to 0.13, and no longer work.
For Ember data 1.0 beta 3 you can do:
App.ApplicationSerializer = DS.RESTSerializer.extend({
serializeAttribute: function(record, json, key, attribute) {
if (attribute.options.transient) {
return;
}
return this._super(record, json, key, attribute);
}
});
Now you can use transient attributes:
App.User = DS.Model.extend({
name: DS.attr('string', {transient: true})
});
These attributes won't be sent to the server when saving records.
When this PR get's merged it will be possible to flag properties as readOnly. But till then there are some workarounds to this, e.g. overriding your addAttributes method in the Adapter and deal with your special properties, here an example how this could look like:
Define your Model by adding the new option readOnly:
App.MyModel = DS.Model.extend({
myMetaProperty: DS.attr('metaProperty', {readOnly: true})
});
and then on the Adapter:
App.Serializer = DS.RESTSerializer.extend({
addAttributes: function(data, record) {
record.eachAttribute(function(name, attribute) {
if (!attribute.options.readOnly) {
this._addAttribute(data, record, name, attribute.type);
}
}, this);
}
});
what this does is to loop over the attributes of your model and when it find's an attribute with the readOnly flag set it skips the property.
I hope this mechanism works for your use case.
Following this answer, to prevent a field from being serialized, override the default serializer for your model:
In app/serializers/person.js:
export default DS.JSONSerializer.extend({
attrs: {
admin: { serialize: false }
}
});
See here for the source PR. This solution works in Ember Data 2, and should work in older versions as well.
Update
This answer is most likely out of date with the current releases of Ember Data. I wouldn't use anything in my answer.
I'm answering this question for reference, and because your comment indicated that the record remains isDirty, but here is my solution for read-only, non-persistent, non-dirty attributes.
Overriding the addAtributes method in your Serializer prevents readOnly attributes from being sent to the server, which is probably exactly what you want, but you need to extend (or reopen) your adapter to override the dirtyRecordsForAttributeChange to prevent the record from becoming dirty:
App.CustomAdapter = DS.RESTAdapter.extend({
dirtyRecordsForAttributeChange: function(dirtySet, record, attrName, newValue, oldValue) {
meta = record.constructor.metaForProperty(attrName);
if (meta && meta.options.readOnly) { return; }
this._super.apply(this, arguments);
};
});
Then you can use readOnly attributes like so:
App.User = DS.Model.extend({
name: DS.attr('string', {readOnly: true})
});
user = App.User.find(1); # => {id: 1, name: 'John Doe'}
user.set('name', 'Jane Doe'); #
user.get('isDirty') # => false
This setup is working for me.