Re: Complicated SQL queries

That's right

On Tue, 06 Feb 2024 22:35:39 +0200, Christian Gonzalez  
<[email protected]> wrote:

> So the map is like a javascript map function that will take in an (Object
> [] ) as a parameter and return an objEntityE that I can make using
> objectContext.newObject(EntityE.class) and filling in the
> variables manually using the.passed in Object[];
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 2:43 AM Jurgen Doll <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> If we were getting DataRow(s) returned then yes, but with a column[] no,
>> and as far as I know there's no way to restructure the ObjectSelect  
>> query
>> to return suitable DataRow(s).
>>
>> Alternatively there is a way to do the transformation as part of the
>> query
>> with:
>>
>> List< OBJECT_E > results = ObjectSelect.query( ObjEntityA.class )
>> .columns( .... )
>> .where( .... )
>> .map( col -> createObjectE( col ) )
>> .select( context );
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 18:26:46 +0200, Christian Gonzalez
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Unfortunately the relationship between ObjectEntityE and  
>> ObjectEntityA is
>> > only one way and it's going from A to E not the other way around which
>> > was
>> > one of the reasons why the query was originally done using raw SQL
>> > statements. Is there a way of manually doing what I'm imagining object
>> > select does in the background when we specify ObjEntity.class in the
>> > query?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:21 AM Jurgen Doll <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Christian
>> >>
>> >> Since the selected columns are all that’s required for ObjEntityE and
>> >> there’s a simple relationship between ObjEntityE and ObjEntityA we
>> >> should
>> >> be able to just get ObjEntityE directly:
>> >>
>> >> List<ObjEntityE> results = ObjectSelect.query( ObjEntityE.class )
>> >> .where( ObjEntityE.PROP_FOR_OBJ_A
>> >>      .dot( ObjEntityA.PROP_FOR_OBJ_B )
>> >>      .dot( ObjEntityB.PROP_FOR_OBJ_C )
>> >>      .dot( ObjEntityC.PROP_FOR_OBJ_D )
>> >>      .dot( ObjEntityD.PROP_B )
>> >>      .eq( "somevalue" ) )
>> >> .select( context );
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >> Jurgen
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> From: Christian Gonzalez
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, 30 January 2024 18:22
>> >> To: [email protected]
>> >> Subject: Re: Complicated SQL queries
>> >>
>> >> Sorry for the late follow up, but this query did return the rows I
>> >> wanted
>> >> using purely cayenne expressions and object select rather than
>> creating
>> >> a
>> >> new objEntity in the model. My last question is if there is any fast
>> >> way to
>> >> convert the returned Array Objects into the ObjEntity class for
>> >> ObjectEntityA. The three rows should be the only properties in the
>> >> class so
>> >> I was wondering if there was a faster way to automatically convert  
>> them
>> >> rather than having to create a new Object using
>> objectContext.newObject
>> >> and
>> >> manually setting the values.
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 12:19 AM Jurgen Doll <[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Ahh, my bad again - I missed the whole point of using ObjectSelect
>> >> > somehow, probably because it's difficult to explain without having
>> >> your
>> >> > model. Anyways here's a shot at it, conceptually the same as what
>> you
>> >> did
>> >> > in the modeller:
>> >> >
>> >> > List<Object[]> results = ObjectSelect.query( ObjEntityA.class )
>> >> > .columns( ObjEntityA.PROP_FOR_OBJ_E.dot( ObjEntityE.PROP_A ),
>> >> >                     ObjEntityA.PROP_FOR_OBJ_E.dot(  
>> ObjEntityE.PROP_B
>> >> ),
>> >> >                     ObjEntityA.PROP_FOR_OBJ_E.dot(  
>> ObjEntityE.PROP_C
>> >> ) )
>> >> > .where(  ObjEntityA.PROP_FOR_OBJ_B.dot( ObjEntityB.PROP_FOR_OBJ_C
>> >> ).dot(
>> >> > ObjEntityC.PROP_FOR_OBJ_D )
>> >> >                   .dot( ObjEntityD.PROP_B )  // this is t3.varB
>> >> >                   .eq( "somevalue" ) )
>> >> > .select( context );
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 22:45:24 +0200, Christian Gonzalez
>> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Looks like it worked, thank you. It is definitely an interesting
>> >> way of
>> >> > > doing it although I'm not sure about how I feel about having to
>> >> make a
>> >> > > new
>> >> > > entity every time a query like this is used but hopefully it  
>> won't
>> >> be
>> >> too
>> >> > > often.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Thank you for your help.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 11:08 AM Jurgen Doll  
>> <[email protected]
>> >
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> Ahh, sorry my bad I didn't see the t0 for tableE.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> There may be other ways to do it but I think adding t3.varB as  
>> an
>> >> > >> attribute to the object entity might be the simplest.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Regards
>> >> > >> Jurgen
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>>


-- 
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/