Well this question might be too localized.
Lets suppose I have forum system to test. Lets delete an user and his posts. Let me use a pseudo-code for the sake of simplificity:
class User
{
function add() { ... }
function delete (userID)
{
container::getOrCreateUserPostObject.deletePostsByUserID (userID)
DELETE FROM users WHERE ID = userID
}
}
class UserPost
{
function deletePostsByUserID (userID)
{
DELETE FROM posts WHERE USERID = userID
}
}
this now must be tested:
function testDeleteUser()
{
container::getOrCreateUserObject.add();
container::getOrCreateUserObject.add();
container::getOrCreateUserObject.delete (1)
// now check in the DB that how many records left, really one was deleted etc.
}
another test
function testDeletePosts
{
container::getOrCreateUserPostObject.deletePostsByUserID (1);
// again, now check in the DB that how many records left, really one was deleted etc.
}
this looks OK so far. The user deletion and user posts deletion works, and their test standalone.
Yes, standalone. We checked if its OK to delete an user and checked if its OK to delete his post. We didnt check if we delete an user with his posts works! There are two good working "lego" elements but is that OK if we put them together?
If I put this "global" test to testDeleteUser() then I repeat the post-deletion test code...
I don't know if i get you right, but in a test, you should not really rely on specific user id's like you are doing in testDeletePosts(), you should rather add a user here as well, add some posts, and delete these posts again. So your test is completely independent.
Update:
Something like this for checking the referential integrity
function testDeleteUsersAndPosts
{
addedUsers[0] = user.add();
addedPosts[0] = post.add(addedUsers[0], 'first Post')
addedPosts[1] = post.add(addedUsers[0], 'second Post')
addedUsers[1] = user.add();
addedPosts[2] = post.add(addedUsers[1], 'third Post for the second user')
// Check how many posts you have
allPosts = post.get().count()
for (id in addedUsers)
{
user.delete(id)
}
// Check how many posts you have now
allPostsNow = post.get().count();
return allPostsNow == (allPosts -3)
}
And something like this for checking the Post deletion only
function testDeletePosts
{
userID = user.add();
addedPost = post.add(userID, 'first Post')
// Check how many posts you have
allPosts = post.get().count()
post.delete(addedPost)
return post.get(addedPost) == false
}
Related
Hello I am learning angular and I'm working on a todo app that stores to local storage. Getting the local storage to remove a single item as well as editing an item has been a challenge and I've not found many good resources.
Right now it looks like its removing the entire array and I'm not sure why. Hopefully Ive included the proper details.
This is is my delete/remove in the CRUD task
deleteTask(task : Task) {
localStorage.removeItem(this.taskKey)
}
This is the delete task in the componant
deleteTask(idx: number) {
this.taskService.deleteTask(new Task(this.addTaskValue))
if( idx >= 0) {
this.taskArr.splice(idx, 1);
}
}
Other Details from the componant
taskArr: Task[];
public addTaskValue: string = '';
constructor(private taskService: TaskService) {}
ngOnInit(): void {
this.addTaskValue = '';
this.taskArr = this.taskService.getAllTasks();
}
Local Storage Image
I've tried to just use the splice out in the deleteTask but that only removed it from the screen and not the local storage. Ive tried a bunch of other things as well but cant recall them all in detail.
In the above code, you provided. I don't see a logic where the taskKey is even being set. I would add some console statements to see if you're even getting the right string in this.taskKey.
deleteTask(task : Task) {
console.log(this.taskKey); // check if this value is "tasks"
localStorage.removeItem(this.taskKey)
}
Essentially it needs to boil down to this.
localstorage.removeItem('tasks').
Pardon me as I'm quite a beginner in coding. I have tried researching for ways to add some missing record into the lists but still can't seem to fit it correctly into my code.
I have two ArrayLists with different resultsets. Say, the first one is derived in other method and stored in abcList. This list is then used in my current fixChartStats method as a param.
In my code, I will check for the corresponding record in abcList with the second list I derive from the hql query in fixChartStats method.
If the record corresponds, then I'll do the necessary action as shown below to update the ApprovedCount number etc, else i set it to 0.
How do I go about adding the records that are missing in second list I got into the first arraylist (i.e. abcList)? Can anyone here shed some light? Do let me know if my questions are unclear. Thanks in advance, guys!
private void fixChartStats(List<TAbcModel> abcList, Map<String, Object> param, List<IssueModel> issueList, List<DestModel> destList) throws Exception {
//initialize the hql query
//translate all fields from Object[] into individual variable
firstRow = true;
for (TAbcModel abc : abcList) {
if (abc.getId().getAbcYear() = abcYear &&
abc.getId().getAbcMonthId() = abcMonthId &&
abc.getId().getAbcApplAccnId().getAccnId().equalsIgnoreCase(abcApplAccnId.getAccnId()) {
if (firstRow) {
abc.setApprovedCount(abcApprovedCount);
abc.setCancelledCount(abcCancelledCount);
firstRow = false;
} else {
abc.setApprovedCount(0);
abc.setCancelledCount(0);
}
}else{
// How to do the necessary here
// Below is what I've tried
abcList.add(abc);
}
}
}
When I debug, I noticed that it was added into the list. But soon after it was added, ConcurrentModificationException was thrown.
Create a local list and add missing records to it then add all elements from the local list to the abcList
List<TAbcModel> temp = new ArrayList<>();
in your loop:
} else {
temp.add(abc);
}
after loop
abcList.addAll(temp);
So I am trying to create this page that compares a user's interest with other users and shows the list of all those users.. Now, with the for loop i created, one particular user's name repeats until the end of the loop. I only one one name per username to appear on the textfield.. However, I don't know how to do that.. Here's my code for showing users with common interests:
Realm realm= Realm.getDefaultInstance();
RealmResults<interests> result=realm.where(interests.class).findAll();
RealmResults<Users> user=realm.where(Users.class).findAll();
for(int i=0;i<result.size();i++)
{
for(int j=0;j<result.size();j++)
{
if(result.get(i).getId().equals(userid))
{
if(result.get(i).getInterest().equals(result.get(j).getInterest()))
{
if(!result.get(j).getId().equals(userid)) {
users = result.get(j).getId();
interestss.append("Interests :" + result.get(i).getInterest());
}
}
id.append("\n"+users);
}
}
}
for(int i=0;i<result.size();i++)
{
for(int j=0;j<result.size();j++)
{
if(result.get(i).getId().equals(userid))
{
if(result.get(i).getInterest().equals(result.get(j).getInterest()))
I'm almost 98% sure that you shouldn't even need to write this kind of code if you use Realm's query system and a link query, instead of looping and comparing things manually.
RealmResults<Interests> interests = realm.where(Interests.class)
.equalTo("user.userId", userId)
.findAll();
Which should be possible if you have a backlink from Interests to Users.
// in Interests class
#LinkingObjects("interest")
private final RealmResults<User> user = null;
I'm having some trouble with one of my methods. A brief overview of what my method is supposed to do. Here's what I have so far.
public boolean addGame(String team1, String team2) {
boolean result;
if (team1.equals(team2))
result = false;
}
if (a game between two parameter teams has previously been added by
earlier call to addGame){
result = false;
}
else {
result = true;
}
I want my method to return false if a game between two parameter teams has previously been added to the conference object by an earlier call to addGame and
if the name of team1 and team2 are the same name.
My issue is the syntax for what's inside of my second if statement. Not sure how to go about it.
Thanks in advance for all the help.
Depends on how long you plan on saving the information. If it is just in the runtime, you can do something such as saving the two teams to an array.
If you want to save it for a longer time, you need some way of persisting the information, possibly a table in a database?
Then, you can query to data and check if the combination existed already.
You can create a history of the added teams:
ArrayList<String> history = new ArrayList<String>();
//As you add the teams
history.add(teamName); //add to history as well
//To check if teams already exist or added before
if(history.contains(team1) || history.contains(team2)){
return false;
}
If you have an ArrayList called games, and the games are stored in the format "team1;team2", then you can do games.indexOf(team1 + ";" + team2) == -1 for the if statement.
I'm having what seems to be a transactional issue in my application. I'm using Java 1.6 and Hibernate 3.2.5.
My application runs a monthly process where it creates billing entries for a every user in the database based on their monthly activity. These billing entries are then used to create Monthly Bill object. The process is:
Get users who have activity in the past month
Create the relevant billing entries for each user
Get the set of billing entries that we've just created
Create a Monthly Bill based on these entries
Everything works fine until Step 3 above. The Billing Entries are correctly created (I can see them in the database if I add a breakpoint after the Billing Entry creation method), but they are not pulled out of the database. As a result, an incorrect Monthly Bill is generated.
If I run the code again (without clearing out the database), new Billing Entries are created and Step 3 pulls out the entries created in the first run (but not the second run). This, to me, is very confusing.
My code looks like the following:
for (User user : usersWithActivities) {
createBillingEntriesForUser(user.getId());
userBillingEntries = getLastMonthsBillingEntriesForUser(user.getId());
createXMLBillForUser(user.getId(), userBillingEntries);
}
The methods called look like the following:
#Transactional
public void createBillingEntriesForUser(Long id) {
UserManager userManager = ManagerFactory.getUserManager();
User user = userManager.getUser(id);
List<AccountEvent> events = getLastMonthsAccountEventsForUser(id);
BillingEntry entry = new BillingEntry();
if (null != events) {
for (AccountEvent event : events) {
if (event.getEventType().equals(EventType.ENABLE)) {
Calendar cal = Calendar.getInstance();
Date eventDate = event.getTimestamp();
cal.setTime(eventDate);
double startDate = cal.get(Calendar.DATE);
double numOfDaysInMonth = cal.getActualMaximum(Calendar.DAY_OF_MONTH);
double numberOfDaysInUse = numOfDaysInMonth - startDate;
double fractionToCharge = numberOfDaysInUse/numOfDaysInMonth;
BigDecimal amount = BigDecimal.valueOf(fractionToCharge * Prices.MONTHLY_COST);
amount.scale();
entry.setAmount(amount);
entry.setUser(user);
entry.setTimestamp(eventDate);
userManager.saveOrUpdate(entry);
}
}
}
}
#Transactional
public Collection<BillingEntry> getLastMonthsBillingEntriesForUser(Long id) {
if (log.isDebugEnabled())
log.debug("Getting all the billing entries for last month for user with ID " + id);
//String queryString = "select billingEntry from BillingEntry as billingEntry where billingEntry>=:firstOfLastMonth and billingEntry.timestamp<:firstOfCurrentMonth and billingEntry.user=:user";
String queryString = "select be from BillingEntry as be join be.user as user where user.id=:id and be.timestamp>=:firstOfLastMonth and be.timestamp<:firstOfCurrentMonth";
//This parameter will be the start of the last month ie. start of billing cycle
SearchParameter firstOfLastMonth = new SearchParameter();
firstOfLastMonth.setTemporalType(TemporalType.DATE);
//this parameter holds the start of the CURRENT month - ie. end of billing cycle
SearchParameter firstOfCurrentMonth = new SearchParameter();
firstOfCurrentMonth.setTemporalType(TemporalType.DATE);
Query query = super.entityManager.createQuery(queryString);
query.setParameter("firstOfCurrentMonth", getFirstOfCurrentMonth());
query.setParameter("firstOfLastMonth", getFirstOfLastMonth());
query.setParameter("id", id);
List<BillingEntry> entries = query.getResultList();
return entries;
}
public MonthlyBill createXMLBillForUser(Long id, Collection<BillingEntry> billingEntries) {
BillingHistoryManager manager = ManagerFactory.getBillingHistoryManager();
UserManager userManager = ManagerFactory.getUserManager();
MonthlyBill mb = new MonthlyBill();
User user = userManager.getUser(id);
mb.setUser(user);
mb.setTimestamp(new Date());
Set<BillingEntry> entries = new HashSet<BillingEntry>();
entries.addAll(billingEntries);
String xml = createXmlForMonthlyBill(user, entries);
mb.setXmlBill(xml);
mb.setBillingEntries(entries);
MonthlyBill bill = (MonthlyBill) manager.saveOrUpdate(mb);
return bill;
}
Help with this issue would be greatly appreciated as its been wracking my brain for weeks now!
Thanks in advance,
Gearoid.
Is your top method also transactional ? If yes most of the time i've encountered that kind of problem, it was a flush that was not done at the right time by hibernate.
Try to add a call to session.flush() at the beginning of the getLastMonthsBillingEntriesForUser method, see if it address your problem.
Call session.flush() AND session.close() before getLastMonthsBillingEntriesForUser gets called.
Please correct my assumptions if they are not correct...
As far as I can tell, the relationship between entry and user is a many to one.
So why is your query doing a "one to many" type join? You should rather make your query:
select be from BillingEntry as be where be.user=:user and be.timestamp >= :firstOfLastMonth and be.timestamp < :firstOfCurrentMonth
And then pass in the User object, not the user id. This query will be a little lighter in that it will not have to fetch the details for the user. i.e. not have to do a select on user.
Unfortunately this is probably not causing your problem, but it's worth fixing nevertheless.
Move the declaration of BillingEntry entry = new BillingEntry(); to within the for loop. That code looks like it's updating one entry over and over again.
I'm guessing here, but what you've coded goes against what I think I know about java persistence and hibernate.
Are you certain that those entries are being persisted properly? In my mind, what is happening is that a new BillingEntry is being created, it is then persisted. At this point the next iteration of the loop simply changes the values of an entry and calls merge. It doesn't look like you're doing anything to create a new BillingEntry after the first time, thus no new id's are generated which is why you can't retrieve them later.
That being said, I'm not convinced the timing of the flush isn't a culprit here either, so I'll wait with bated breathe for the downvotes.