nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

parent values of nested replicants

TroyP

I have a DCT with nested replicants. The top level replicants are call navigation and the inner replicants are called sub-navigation.

Both navigation and sub-navigation replicants have an HTMLID field which have unique values.

I want to deploy all replicants to the same table and insert the value of the navigation (parent) HTMLID for each row inserted from the sub-navigation into a column called Parent.

I have attached the deploy config file I have. As it exists, only the rows from the navigation are inserted. If I remove the column tag for the parent column the all rows from the navigation and sub-navigation get inserted without the parent HTML ID.

See attached DD config file.
OD 6.1.1
TS 6.7.1 SP1 and custom DCRs

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Migrateduser

can you post a sample DCR as well.

TroyP

can you post a sample DCR as well.

done above.

dynamictopandbottomN.rptdesign

Migrateduser

so let me see if I am understanding this..

1 - is this the nested replicant issue from your other post
2 - your DD config you posted shows the parent field in the 2nd group as the same value as the current records HTMLID, I assume that was supposed to be the parent ID?

also, you will (eventually) need to add to your child group regardless a FK

like:

[html]

[/html]

TroyP

so let me see if I am understanding this..

1 - is this the nested replicant issue from your other post
2 - your DD config you posted shows the parent field in the 2nd group as the same value as the current records HTMLID, I assume that was supposed to be the parent ID?

also, you will (eventually) need to add to your child group regardless a FK

like:

[html]

[/html]

For #1 - I don't know what "other" post you mean. Do you mean the one that started the thread?

For #2 - I am not sure I understand your question but let me explain. Here is a representation of the replicant structure (nav and subnav). The parent column of each row created when deploying the subnav shoud be equal to the parent navigation's htmlid. See diagram below. In this case there should be 7 rows deploy to my table ( 4 from the nav and 3 from the subnav)

If by "current record" you mean the one in the root group then my answer to your question is yes.

nav1 (htmlid="yyy" parent="")
nav2 (htmlid="****" parent="")
nav3 (htmlid="abc" parent="")
--subnav1 (htmlid="xyz1", parent="abc")
--subnav2 (htmlid="xyz2", parent="abc")
--subnav3 (htmlid="xyz3", parent="abc")
nav4 (htmlid="zzz", parent="")

I'll add the foreign key thank you.

Migrateduser

For #1 - I don't know what "other" post you mean. Do you mean the one that started the thread?

For #2 - I am not sure I understand your question but let me explain. Here is a representation of the replicant structure (nav and subnav). The parent column of each row created when deploying the subnav shoud be equal to the parent navigation's htmlid. See diagram below. In this case there should be 7 rows deploy to my table ( 4 from the nav and 3 from the subnav)

If by "current record" you mean the one in the root group then my answer to your question is yes.

nav1 (htmlid="yyy" parent="")
nav2 (htmlid="****" parent="")
nav3 (htmlid="abc" parent="")
--subnav1 (htmlid="xyz1", parent="abc")
--subnav2 (htmlid="xyz2", parent="abc")
--subnav3 (htmlid="xyz3", parent="abc")
nav4 (htmlid="zzz", parent="")
I'll add the foreign key thank you.

sorry.. this was the other thread... http://devnet.interwoven.com/forums_vb/showthread.php?t=28781&forumid=12

I thought you had started it, which is why I was wondering if its the same issue, my mistake.. as for the DD part..

try this:

[HTML]

[/HTML]

blob_clob.rptdesign

TroyP

This error is produced using the code you suggest. When I remove the foreign key setting the deployment works but only deploys the rows from the root group and not the nested sub-nav group. I think you're on the correct track though.

java.sql.SQLException: [SNY2AFSDBDEV01\ADL]Tables or functions 'TS_CONTENT_01' and 'TS_CONTENT_01' have the same exposed names. Use correlation names to distinguish them.

Migrateduser

This error is produced using the code you suggest. When I remove the foreign key setting the deployment works but only deploys the rows from the root group and not the nested sub-nav group. I think you're on the correct track though.

java.sql.SQLException: [SNY2AFSDBDEV01\ADL]Tables or functions 'TS_CONTENT_01' and 'TS_CONTENT_01' have the same exposed names. Use correlation names to distinguish them.

yeah.. I see whats happening.. I wonder if its the version of DD your using.. I have a couple workarounds I can think of.. I will post back in a moment

Migrateduser

ok.. so I believe it has to do with the fact that your deploying to table used by the root-group twice..

solution would be:

use an updateable view (I know this works on Oracle, have not tried on MS SQL)

-- create a view of the TS_CONTENT_01 table, call it something else.. like TS_CONTENT_01_CMS

-- set table-view = "yes" in your database line such as:
[html][/html]-- change the table name in your 2nd group to TS_CONTENT_01_CMS

DataDeploy is basically not aliasing the tables, nothing you can really do about that directly, only work around it..

so something like:
[html]

[/html]--or--

I am also thinking of a solution where you would create a new table that you will soley use as your root group.. so when you do your foreign key back to the root-group, you dont need to worry about it using the same table name twice.. problem is.. you root-group is a replicant.. which might cause a problem with your FK..

you can try to just create a dummy table to use for the root group.. and always reference back to that.. something like this.. not sure it will work.. but it might..

[html]

[/html]

TroyP

Interesting... based on your last post it sounds like this is an issue for SQL Server rather than Oracle. Agree?

I also assume that the in the second example the second group should have a root-group attribute set to "no" rather than yes.

DBD: Table [TS_CONTENT_01] exists.
DBD: Table [TS_CONTENT_01_CMS] does not exist. Creating..
DBD: CREATE TABLE TS_CONTENT_01_CMS(Parent VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,htmlid VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,text VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,url VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,audience VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,nofollow VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,SiblingPosition VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL , CONSTRAINT TS_CONTENT_01_CMS_key PRIMARY KEY (htmlid))
DBD:
DBD: *******************************************************
DBD: SQLException occured in TableSchema:CreateViaSql()
DBD: Exception Message: [SNY2AFSDBDEV01\ADL]There is already an object named 'TS_CONTENT_01_CMS' in the database.
DBD: Vendor Error Code: 2714
DBD: SQL state: 01000
DBD: *******************************************************
DBD:
DBD: *******STACK TRACE*************
DBD: ERROR:
java.sql.SQLException: [SNY2AFSDBDEV01\ADL]There is already an object named 'TS_CONTENT_01_CMS' in the database.

Migrateduser

Interesting... based on your last post it sounds like this is an issue for SQL Server rather than Oracle. Agree?

no, this would be an issue for Oracle too, I had a similar issue with Oracle.. and that was how I solved it without creating other tables...

what is your DB?

I also assume that the in the second example the second group should have a root-group attribute set to "no" rather than yes.

DBD: Table [TS_CONTENT_01] exists.
DBD: Table [TS_CONTENT_01_CMS] does not exist. Creating..
DBD: CREATE TABLE TS_CONTENT_01_CMS(Parent VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,htmlid VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,text VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,url VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,audience VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,nofollow VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL ,SiblingPosition VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL , CONSTRAINT TS_CONTENT_01_CMS_key PRIMARY KEY (htmlid))
DBD:
DBD: *******************************************************
DBD: SQLException occured in TableSchema:CreateViaSql()
DBD: Exception Message: [SNY2AFSDBDEV01\ADL]There is already an object named 'TS_CONTENT_01_CMS' in the database.
DBD: Vendor Error Code: 2714
DBD: SQL state: 01000
DBD: *******************************************************
DBD:
DBD: *******STACK TRACE*************
DBD: ERROR:
java.sql.SQLException: [SNY2AFSDBDEV01\ADL]There is already an object named 'TS_CONTENT_01_CMS' in the database.

sorry.. root group should be yes for group 1, no for others.. typo.. I corrected it..

but also, you need to create it as a view, not just let IWOV create it as a table..

group.PNG

TroyP

no, this would be an issue for Oracle too, I had a similar issue with Oracle.. and that was how I solved it without creating other tables...

what is your DB?

sorry.. root group should be yes for group 1, no for others.. typo.. I corrected it..

but also, you need to create it as a view, not just let IWOV create it as a table..

When I said,

...based on your last post it sounds like this is an issue for SQL Server rather than Oracle.

I was referring to the fact you knew a view would work on Oracle but were not sure about SQL Server. I am using SQL Server right now but will move to Oracle when we get out of development.

I tried the second options and created a dummy table. I only got the "outer" rows deployed with the parent column equal to the htmlid column.

Migrateduser

When I said, I was referring to the fact you knew a view would work on Oracle but were not sure about SQL Server. I am using SQL Server right now but will move to Oracle when we get out of development.

I tried the second options and created a dummy table. I only got the "outer" rows deployed with the parent column equal to the htmlid column.

it sounds like your running into the issue with the nested containers from that other post.. can you upgrade OD? or is that not an option?

Migrateduser

if it is the nested replicant issue.. technically this would work:

[html]

[/html]problem is, your not using the replicant in the "nested" replicant, your manually expanding the outer replicant.. so you would need to add one group for EACH instance of the outer replicants.. based on the support KB item, this was fixed after 6.1.1

watermark_basedon_datasetvalue.rptdesign

draft.png

OracleDB_bfcode.txt

TroyP

it sounds like your running into the issue with the nested containers from that other post.. can you upgrade OD? or is that not an option?

Yes, I think I agree. I thought about the other thread before I posed to it. I have been able to deploy nested replicant values to the same rows as the parent values in the root group so I convinced my self this we different.

Can I upgrade? Maybe. I'll have to talk to the project managers.

Thanks for your help.

Migrateduser

Yes, I think I agree. I thought about the other thread before I posed to it. I have been able to deploy nested replicant values to the same rows as the parent values in the root group so I convinced my self this we different.

Can I upgrade? Maybe. I'll have to talk to the project managers.

Thanks for your help.

if you look at my last post.. you will see a "workaround" sort of..

TroyP

I haven't tried you last example yet but if I read it correctly then each group is for deploying a separate "parent" navigation element. This would mean I would have to have a group for each parent navigation item so if there were eight parent navigation items we would have groups CR_LeftNav2a to CR_LeftNav2h with column value from fields matching the following:

navigation-element/0/navigation/0/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/1/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/2/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/3/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/4/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/5/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/6/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/7/*

If this is true then do you agree that we would have to hard code the number of navigation elements we have? Wouldn't we have to worry about index out of bound exceptions? Did you just give this example as a way of testing for the "nested replicant issue"?

This is TS 6.7.1 SP1, OD 6.1.1

Migrateduser

I haven't tried you last example yet but if I read it correctly then each group is for deploying a separate "parent" navigation element. This would mean I would have to have a group for each parent navigation item so if there were eight parent navigation items we would have groups CR_LeftNav2a to CR_LeftNav2h with column value from fields matching the following:

navigation-element/0/navigation/0/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/1/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/2/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/3/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/4/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/5/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/6/*
navigation-element/0/navigation/7/*

If this is true then do you agree that we would have to hard code the number of navigation elements we have? Wouldn't we have to worry about index out of bound exceptions? Did you just give this example as a way of testing for the "nested replicant issue"?

This is TS 6.7.1 SP1, OD 6.1.1

you are hard coding the "max" number of groups you have.. It is a workaround, and not ideal, but, by using the skip-group-if-null="yes" attribute in the group, you would not need to worry about out-of-bounds issue. you whatever you "max" number of parents is, you would have a group for each to handle the children and no longer "nesting" the replicants at that point.

so for example, if you only had 4 nav items, as soon as it got to 5, it would skip it.. (which it really does not "skip", it just completes the deployment at that point).. so if you have other groups being deploy, you need to make sure you list these hard coded groups last, becuase as soon as it gets to a "null" one.. it ends the deployment (without errors)

you also need to make sure this field is set to not allow null in the Datbase (not just in the DD config) to get this to work properly:

[html]
[/html]

Capture.PNG

TroyP

Even with the last example I only get two rows in the DB. One for each of the parent navs.

I am going to contact support to see if it is "bug" related.

I may try to use two tables and do a join.

Migrateduser

Even with the last example I only get two rows in the DB. One for each of the parent navs.

I am going to contact support to see if it is "bug" related.

I may try to use two tables and do a join.

can you post the full DataDeploy log from your last run?

Migrateduser

i see the error i think..

this is wrong:
[html]

[/html]

it should be:

[html]

[/html]

TroyP

can you post the full DataDeploy log from your last run?

When I went to get the logfile I saw the error and fixed it. The last fix is working.

The error was that somewhere in our discussion the name of an item from the DCT was coded to a different name.

[HTML]

should have been

[/HTML]

I have gone back and change the DCT and deploy config from your last post and attached them for others.

I need to go back and try your fist deploy configuration recommendation to make sure the name change didn't effect the results of my tests. I don't think it did because tables have been drop and recreated since then and the log files didn't indicate a "null not allowed for column text" error.

I'll update the thread after testing.

TroyP

I have a DCT with nested replicants. The top level replicants are call navigation and the inner replicants are called sub-navigation.

Both navigation and sub-navigation replicants have an HTMLID field which have unique values.

I want to deploy all replicants to the same table and insert the value of the navigation (parent) HTMLID for each row inserted from the sub-navigation into a column called Parent.

I have attached the deploy config file I have. As it exists, only the rows from the navigation are inserted. If I remove the column tag for the parent column the all rows from the navigation and sub-navigation get inserted without the parent HTML ID.

See attached DD config file.
OD 6.1.1
TS 6.7.1 SP1 and custom DCRs

This is a follow up to my original post that is not related to the posts since the first. At some point I upload the incorrect file because I wanted to remove a password so that one line was different from the version I wanted to upload. I am uploading the correct one now. The correct line is below and matches the one jrandallnyc first recommended post below.

I am uploading the file so that people are not confused by looking at the dd-config.txt attached and seeing I was trying to use the sub-nav HTMLID in place of the Parent HTMLID.

[HTML]

should be

[/HTML]

TroyP

I need to go back and try your first deploy configuration recommendation to make sure the name change didn't effect the results of my tests. I don't think it did because tables have been drop and recreated since then and the log files didn't indicate a "null not allowed for column text" error.

I'll update the thread after testing.

I have rested everything and all the problems and results are the same as in the previous posts. So changing the reference to to the "text" item was not the root cause of the problem.

Migrateduser

I have rested everything and all the problems and results are the same as in the previous posts. So changing the reference to to the "text" item was not the root cause of the problem.

so is this still an issue??? or is it working now??