I have following database relationship:
In words: One Order has 0-n Books, one Order is assigned to one Customer.
In my case, I have bookId. I want to launch some function when I get all associated items (Book, Order and Customer) and when I am assured all of them exists - I need to launch it only one time. I tried to solve it following way:
ViewModel:
private LiveData<Book> book;
private LiveData<Order> order;
private LiveData<Customer> customer;
public MyViewModel(Application app) {
...
book = bookRepository.getBookLiveData(id);
order = Transformations.switchMap(book, b -> orderRepository.getOrder(b.getIdOrder()));
customer = Transformations.switchMap(order, o -> customerRepository.getCustomer(o.getIdCustomer()));
}
However, this solution is uneffective and I believe this can be done some more elegant way with Room/LiveData.
I tried also another approach - creating following object BookOrderCustomer:
public class BookOrderCustomer {
#Embedded
public Book book;
#Embedded
public Order order;
#Embedded
public Customer customer;
}
But this did not work as expected,Dao's query always returned null.
Any idea how to solve this case? Thank you.
There is the MediatorLiveData, it could observe all your streams and merge data. I think this is a best approach.
In an Android app using Architecture Components I have the following view model:
public class MainViewModel extends AndroidViewModel {
private final MutableLiveData<List<String>> mUnchecked = new MutableLiveData<>();
private LiveData<List<String>> mChecked;
public void setUnchecked(List<String> list) {
mUnchecked.setValue(list);
}
public LiveData<List<String>> getChecked() { // OBSERVED BY A FRAGMENT
return mChecked;
}
public MainViewModel(Application app) {
super(app);
mChecked = Transformations.switchMap(mUnchecked,
list-> myDao().checkWords(list));
}
The purpose of the above switchMap is to check, which of the words passed as a list of strings, do exist in a Room table:
#Dao
public interface MyDao {
#Query("SELECT word FROM dictionary WHERE word IN (:words)")
LiveData<List<String>> checkWords(List<String> words);
The above code works well for me!
However I am stuck with wanting something slightly different -
Instead of the list of strings, I would prefer to pass a map of strings (words) -> integers (scores):
public void setUnchecked(Map<String,Integer> map) {
mUnchecked.setValue(map);
}
The integers would be word scores in my game. And once the checkWords() has returned the results, I would like to set the scores to null for the words not found in the Room table and leave the other scores as they are.
The programming code would be easy (iterate through mChecked.getValue() and set to null for the words not found in the list returned by the DAO method) - but how to "marry" it with my LiveData members?
TL;DR
I would like to change my view model to hold maps instead of the lists:
public class MainViewModel extends AndroidViewModel {
private final MutableLiveData<Map<String,Integer>> mUnchecked = new MutableLiveData<>();
private final MutableLiveData<Map<String,Integer>> mChecked = new MutableLiveData<>();
public void setUnchecked(Map<String,Integer> map) {
mUnchecked.setValue(map);
}
public LiveData<Map<String,Integer>> getChecked() { // OBSERVED BY A FRAGMENT
return mChecked;
}
public MainViewModel(Application app) {
super(app);
// HOW TO OBSERVE mUnchecked
// AND RUN myDao().checkWords(new ArrayList<>(mUnchecked.getValue().keys()))
// WRAPPED IN Executors.newSingleThreadScheduledExecutor().execute( ... )
// AND THEN CALL mChecked.postValue() ?
}
How to achieve that please? Should I extend MutableLiveData or maybe use MediatorLiveData or maybe use Transformations.switchMap()?
UPDATE:
I will try the following tomorrow (today is too late in the evening) -
The Dao method I will change to return a list instead of LiveData:
#Query("SELECT word FROM dictionary WHERE word IN (:words)")
List<String> checkWords(List<String> words);
And then I will try to extend the MutableLiveData:
private final MutableLiveData<Map<String,Integer>> mChecked = new MutableLiveData<>();
private final MutableLiveData<Map<String,Integer>> mUnchecked = new MutableLiveData<Map<String,Integer>>() {
#Override
public void setValue(Map<String,Integer> uncheckedMap) {
super.setValue(uncheckedMap);
Executors.newSingleThreadScheduledExecutor().execute(() -> {
List<String> uncheckedList = new ArrayList<>(uncheckedMap.keySet());
List<String> checkedList = WordsDatabase.getInstance(mApp).wordsDao().checkWords(uncheckedList);
Map<String,Integer> checkedMap = new HashMap<>();
for (String word: uncheckedList) {
Integer score = (checkedList.contains(word) ? uncheckedMap.get(word) : null);
checkedMap.put(word, score);
}
mChecked.postValue(checkedMap);
});
}
};
Well, what you have there in the update probably works, though I wouldn't create a new Executor for every setValue() call — create just one and hold onto it in your MutableLiveData subclass. Also, depending on your minSdkVersion, you might use some of the Java 8 stuff on HashMap (e.g., replaceAll()) to simplify the code a bit.
You could use MediatorLiveData, though in the end I think it would result in more code, not less. So, while from a purity standpoint MediatorLiveData is a better answer, that may not be a good reason for you to use it.
Frankly, this sort of thing isn't what LiveData is really set up for, IMHO. If this were my code that I were working on right now, I'd be using RxJava for the bulk of it, converting to LiveData in the end. And, I'd have as much of this as possible in a repository, rather than in a viewmodel. While your unchecked-to-checked stuff would be a tricky RxJava chain to work out, I'd still prefer it to the MutableLiveData subclass.
What EpicPandaForce suggests is an ideal sort of LiveData-only approach, though I don't think he is implementing your algorithm quite correctly, and I am skeptical that it can be adapted easily to your desired algorithm.
In the end, though, the decision kinda comes down to: who is going to see this code?
If this code is for your eyes only, or will live in a dusty GitHub repo that few are likely to look at, then if you feel that you can maintain the MutableLiveData subclass, we can't really complain.
If this code is going to be reviewed by co-workers, ask your co-workers what they think.
If this code is going to be reviewed by prospective employers... consider RxJava. Yes, it has a learning curve, but for the purposes of getting interest from employers, they will be more impressed by you knowing how to use RxJava than by you knowing how to hack LiveData to get what you want.
Tricky question!
If we check the source code for Transformations.switchMap, we see that:
1.) it wraps the provided live data with a MediatorLiveData
2.) if the wrapped live data emits an event, then it invokes a function that receives the new value of wrapped live data, and returns a "new" live data of a different type
3.) if the "new" live data of a different type differs from the previous one, then the observer of the previous one is removed, and it's added to the new one instead (so that you only observe the newest LiveData and don't accidentally end up observing an old one)
With that in mind, I think we can chain your switchMap calls and create a new LiveData whenever myDao().checkWords(words) changes.
LiveData<List<String>> foundInDb = Transformations.switchMap(mWords, words -> myDao().checkWords(words));
LiveData<Map<String, Integer>> found = Transformations.switchMap(foundInDb, (words) -> {
MutableLiveData<Map<String, Integer>> scoreMap = new MutableLiveData<>();
// calculate the score map from `words` list
scoreMap.setValue(map);
return scoreMap;
});
this.mFound = found;
Please verify if what I'm telling you is correct, though.
Also if there are a bunch of words, consider using some async mechanism and scoreMap.postValue(map).
I am trying to find a way to insert a child object in its parent object without having to do a query for each one.
Let me be more specific:
class Parent extends RealmObject {
String id;
RealmList<Child> childs;
}
class Child extends RealmObject {
String parentId;
}
And suppose I make a request in a webservice to get child object of different parents... so, now I have:
List<Child> childsOfDifferentParents;
And I want to add to link each child to its correct parent.
The only way I've found so far was, query for each parent and add it.
But, since it is too many objects, it wouldn't be efficient. What should I do?
In this example, the docs talked about getting the parent objects while specifying queries for the child objects.
Is there a way for getting the child objects while specifying a query for the parent object?
In the given example, can I search for dogs who are of brown color with the user named John?
EDIT: Since Realm 3.5.0, you can actually use the "backlinks" mentioned in the comment section. Rejoice!
In fact, since Realm 3.0.0, bidirectional links are a performance bottleneck, so using backlinks is the preferred way.
The way it works is:
public class User extends RealmObject {
private RealmList<Dog> dogs;
}
public class Dog extends RealmObject {
#LinkingObjects("dogs")
private final RealmResults<User> owners = null;
}
Now you can do:
realm.where(Dog.class).equalTo("color", "Brown").equalTo("owners.name", "John").findAll();
OLD ANSWER:
You can only search for dogs with a given user if you have an object link to the User.
public class Dog extends RealmObject {
//...
private User user;
}
Then you could do
realm.where(Dog.class).equalTo("color", "Brown").equalTo("user.name", "John").findAll();
I want to persist an object with two foreignCollections.
But when I try to query the object, my foreignId is always null.
I already read this answers but it doesn't really help me: Collections in ORMLite
VOPerception perception = new VOPerception();
perception.setOrientation(daoOrientation.createIfNotExists(
orientationLocalizer.getCurrentOrientation()));
ForeignCollection<VOAccessPoint> fAp =
daoPerception.getEmptyForeignCollection("accessPoints");
fAp.addAll(wifiLocalizer.getCurrentScanResultMap());
perception.setAccessPoints(fAp);
daoPerception.create(perception);
List<VOPerception> list = daoPerception.queryForAll();
here data are correctly stored but VOAccessPoint objects have no link with the parent VOPerception object.
Here are my two classes:
public class VOPerception {
#DatabaseField(generatedId=true)
private int per_id;
#ForeignCollectionField(eager=true)
ForeignCollection<VOAccessPoint> accessPoints;
...
}
public class VOAccessPoint{
#DatabaseField(generatedId=true)
private int ap_id;
#DatabaseField(foreign=true,columnName="apForeignPerception_id")
private VOPerception apForeignPerception;
...
}
Your queryForAll() is returning no objects because none of your VOAccessPoint instances ever set their apForeignPerception field to be perception. Adding the VOAccessPoint objects using the ForeignCollection added them to the DAO but did not automagically assign their apForeignPerception field.
You should do something like:
...
Collection<VOAccessPoint> points = wifiLocalizer.getCurrentScanResultMap();
for (VOAccessPoint point : points) {
point.setApForeignPerception(perception);
}
fAp.addAll(points);
...
I can see how you might think that this would be handled automagically but at the time they are added to the ForeignCollection, the perception is not even assigned. I suspect that there is a missing feature for ORMLite here or at least a better exception.
I would recommend to use assignEmptyForeignCollection(Obj parent, fieldName). This will create a new foreign collection and all objects you will add via add(Obj element) will have the parent value set automatically.