I have some code where I want a NoteCollectionView to add a new Note to the NoteCollection. This is triggered by a function newNote in the NoteCollectionView:
newNote: function(data) {
var note = new Note(data);
this.collection.add(note);
},
I'm still very new to backbone, and I want to make sure this syncs with the server. The concerns I have are:
1) Will simply adding this note to the collection trigger a save() from the server, and update the model with the ID that the server gives it? Or,
2) If the server does not update my model and give me an actual ID, how do I save the model with note.save() and get back an ID from the server?
To address your first question, no, .add will not trigger any kind of call to the server; it will only add a model to a collection.
However, you do have a couple options. One would be to create the new note model, save it to the database, and then add it to the collection:
newNote: function(data) {
var note = new Note(data);
note.save();
this.collection.add(note);
}
The second option is to simply use Backbone's collection.create method. Give it a hash of attributes and it will
Create the model
Save it to the database
Add it to the collection
All in one fell swoop, like so:
newNote: function(data) {
return this.collection.create(data);
}
collection.create also returns the newly created model, illustrated by my return statement above.
Related
tl;dr
How to use backbone.stickit with a html form to change an existing model fetched from the server and only PATCH the changed attributes (changed by user input within the html form) to the server?
/tl;dr
I'm using backbone.stickit in a backbone.js application to bind a model to a HTML-form which is part of a backbone view. This works fine so far, but it becomes a little bit complicated if I'm going to save the bound model. This is because I want to use the PATCH-method and only send the changed attributes to the server. I try to illustrate what I've done so far:
Fetching the model from Server
user = new User(); //instatiate a new user-model
user.fetch(); //fetching the model from the server
console.log(user.changedAttributes()); // Returns ALL attributes, because model was empty
The last line indicates my problem, because I thought I can used the changedAtrributes() method later to get the attributes which need a patch on the server. So I tried this workaround which I found here
user.fetch({
success: function (model, response, options) {
model.set({});
}
});
user.changedAtrributes(); //Returns now "false"
Do stickit-bindings
Now I render my view and call the stickit() method on the view, to do the bindings:
//Bindings specified in the view:
[...]
bindings: {
"#username" : "username"
"#age" : "age"
}
[...]
//within the render method of the view
this.stickit();
The bindings work fine and my user model gets updated, but changedAttributes() remain empty all the time.
Save the model to the server
If the user has made all required changes, the model should be saved to the server. I want to use the PATCH method and only send the changed attributes to the server.
user.save(null, {patch:true}); //PATCH method is used but ALL attributes are sent to the server
OR
user.save(user.changedAttributes(),{patch : true});
With the second approach there are different outcomes:
if I didn't use the user.set({}) woraround, all attributes get PATCHED to the server
if I use the user.set({}) woraround the return value of changedAttributes() is "false" and all attributes are PUT to the server
if I call a user.set("age","123") before calling save(), then only the age attribute is PATCHED to the server
So outcome 3 is my desired behaviour, but there are 2 problems with this: First stickit doesn't seem to use the set() method on the model to update the attributes if they are changed within the html-form. And second, if you call set() with one attribute and afterwards with another, only the second attributes is returned by changedAttributes().
Maybe I just overseen something in the backbone or backbone.stickit docs, so I didn't get the desired behaviour working. Any ideas about that?
NOTE: As found out the problem wasn't directly related to backbone.stickit, more to backbone itself.
Solved this problem on my own, maybe this helps someone who may stumble upon this question:
Backbone only keep track of unchanged attributes, but not of unsaved attributes. So with
model.changedAttributes();
you will only get the attributes of the model, which was changed since the last
model.set("some_attribute","some_value")
Finally I stumbled upon backbone.trackit which is a backbone.js plugin maintained by the creator of backbone.stickit. With this plugin you can track unsaved attributes (all attributes which have changed since the last model.save()) and then use them in the save-method of a model. Example (my usecase):
Backbone.View.extend({
bindings: {
"#name" : "name",
"#age" : "age"
},
initialize: function () {
this.model = new User();
this.model.fetch({
success: function (model, response, options) {
//this tells backbone.stickit to track unsaved attributes
model.startTracking();
}
});
},
render: function () {
this.$el.html(tmpl);
this.stickit();
return this;
},
onSaveUserToServer: function () {
//first argument: only unsaved attributes, second argument: tell backbone to PATCH
this.model.save(this.model.unsavedAttributes(), { patch: true });
});
});
First off, some background
My client has a kind of a "split-view", meaning- a side-panel displaying a list of objects and a main view displaying the selected object's details. Every time the user clicks on an Object in the list, a Backbone's route is called to navigate to the id which updates a "selected" property on the Session, what causes the main view to update- pretty standard stuff.
The problem
I want the client to be as responsive as possible, therefore i'm trying to utilize Meteor's abillity to update the client immediately without waiting for a server confirmation.
My goal is that every time an Object is created, the list and the main view will be instantly updated to reflect the newly added Object. To achieve this I created a Meteor.method, create(), that uses Collection.insert and returns the id so I can use it with my Route. The method is shared across the client and server and is being called from within a template's event handler.
My first try was to store the returned id in a variable in the event handler and update the Route in the next line; For some reason, that didn't work because the method returned an undefined value. So I tried a different approach, instead of returning the id, I used it within the method to update the Route directly (if Meteor.isClient of course). That didn't work either because the id returned by Collection.insert in the client's version of the method was different from the one in the server's version.
First approach
Template.createDialog.events({
'click #btn-dialog-create': function (event, template) {
var objectId = Meteor.call('create');
appRouter.navigate("object/id/" + objectId, {trigger:true});
}
});
Second approach
Meteor.methods({
create: function () {
var ObjectId = Objects.insert({name:'test'});
if(Meteor.isClient){
appRouter.navigate("object/id/" + objectId, {trigger:true});
}
}
});
If anyone knows what's going on and can give me some directions that would be great.
Any different approaches to the problem or suggestions would be much appreciated as well.
Thanks
Update
So I tried #Pent's suggestion and I got the same result as with my second approach. For some odd reason Meteor decides to ignore my id (created with Random.id()) and inserts the object with a different one.
So I tried another approach, I used just a simple string value instead of Random.id() and voila - it worked. Riddle me that.
Answer updated:
This will be both a client and server method:
Meteor.methods({
create: function () {
var id = Random.id();
Objects.insert({_id: id, name:'test'});
if(this.isSimulation) {
appRouter.navigate("object/id/" + id, {trigger:true});
}
}
});
You can view a similar pattern from Meteor's party example: https://github.com/meteor/meteor/blob/b28c81724101f84547c6c6b9c203353f2e05fbb7/examples/parties/model.js#L56
Your problem is coused by the fact that remote methods, i.e. those which will be called on the server, don't simply return any value. Instead, they accept a callback that will be used to process the returned value (see docs). So in your first example you should probably do something like this:
Template.createDialog.events({
'click #btn-dialog-create': function (event, template) {
Meteor.call('create', function (error, result) {
if (!error)
appRouter.navigate("object/id/" + result, {trigger:true});
});
}
});
You also said:
I want the client to be as responsive as possible, therefore i'm trying to utilize Meteor's abillity to update the client immediately without waiting for a server confirmation.
I think that in this case you should definitely wait for server response. Note, that there is no chance you get the correct object id unless this is given to you by the server.
One possible way to get around this issue is to create a local (client-side) collection:
// only on client
var temporary = new Meteor.Collection(null); // null name
in which you could store your "temporary" newly created objects, and then save them to the "real" collection after the user clicks the save button. You could implement your router to respond to urls like object/new/* to get access to these objects before they're saved to your database.
The correct answer for this question is defining a client side method that's responsible for creating the unique id (preferably using Random.id() ) and calling the Meteor.methods' create(). That way, you can have the id available immediately without waiting for the server to generate one. The trick here is to generate the id outside of the Meteor.method so that the id generation happens only once for both the stub and the actual server method.
create = function(){
var id = Random.id();
Meteor.call('create', id);
return id;
}
Meteor.methods({
create: function (id) {
Objects.insert({_id: id, name:'test'});
//more code...
}
});
//and in the Template...
Template.createDialog.events({
'click #btn-dialog-create': function (event, template) {
var objectId = create();
appRouter.navigate("object/id/" + objectId, {trigger:true});
}
});
I have a collection (an object list) in database. I can fetch it like: collectionModel.fetch()
But then user changes something on that collection. When user clickes on save button, the whole collection list must be update in database. I thought maybe i can delete() the old one first and then create() it with new one but i could'n achive it. I can't use the update() method because in this case i should find which collection elements has changed but i want to update whole list. How can i do that? Thanks for help.
Do you have a REST api in front of that database? That's how Backbone is made to work with. When your JavaScript code runs model.save(); a PUT request is made to your api for that model.
You question is about saving the whole collection, for that if you want to remain within the default implementation of Backbone you will have to go over all the models in the collection and call save for each of them.
If you want to make one single request to your server you will have to implement a custom method inside your collection. Something like:
MyCollection = Backbone.Collection.extend({
saveAll: function() {
var data = this.toJSON();
return Backbone.$.ajax({
data: { objects: data },
url: '/url/in/your/server/to/update/db'
});
}
});
That's going to send the array of all models in your collection converted to JSON to your server.
Again, you want to have a RESTful API on the server side if you want to make your life with Backbone easy.
If you want to reset collection you have to specify "reset" attribute.
collectionList.fetch({
reset: true,
...
});
But I think it's better to just update it:
collectionList.fetch({
remove: false,
update: true,
merge: true,
...
});
This is a very old question, but I had another approach so I thought I'd post it.
Sometimes my collections have a lot of data and the server doesn't get it all. I solved this by using one of the underscore methods that backbone collections have, invoke (also relies on jquery):
MyCollection = Backbone.Collection.extend({
update: function(callback) {
// Invoke the update method on all models
$.when.apply($, this.invoke('update')).then(() => {
// After complete call the callback method (if passsed)
if(callback) {
callback();
}
});
}
});
You can use it by calling collection.update() when the collection has models in it. A similar method can be used for creating or deleting collections, and this should be modifiable to catch errors but I didn't account for that.
Currently i have a call to server that returns two objects and one of the objects i use to set a collection. (i poll this every 10 seconds, and soon will be using socket.io for this).
I am noticing that my models initialize function is called every time i use set collection with object. I thought the set was smart and only added/changed attr or removed models and for ones unchanged just did nothing.
// All Orders Collection
var AllOrders = Backbone.Collection.extend({
model: Order,
url: '/venues/orders'
});
var Order = Backbone.DeepModel.extend({
idAttribute: 'orderid',
url: '/venues/orders',
initialize : function(){
// this is called everytime i use set even if model is in collection
// do stuff
}
})
*****************
app.allOrders.set( app.getOrders.get('orders') );
If you look at the backbone source,
When merging models into a collection the _prepareModel method is called before merging which creates a new model from the passed in attributes.
Here is the set code,
if (!(model = this._prepareModel(attrs = models[i], options))) continue;
// If a duplicate is found, prevent it from being added and
// optionally merge it into the existing model.
if (existing = this.get(model)) {
if (remove) modelMap[existing.cid] = true;
if (merge) {
attrs = attrs === model ? model.attributes : options._attrs;
existing.set(attrs, options);
if (sortable && !sort && existing.hasChanged(sortAttr)) sort = true;
}
So what happens is,
A new model is created from your passed in attributes
The collection is queried for an existing model with a same id as the new one.
If the merge options is true it pushes the new attributes to the existing model.
This depends on how you write your client and services. By default the GET /venues/orders returns the whole order list. If you want to fetch the changes only you have to write your custom sync for the order collection which keeps the current orders, and fetches the changes only from the server (e.g. you send the current ids, or you send the timestamp of the last call). Btw. the initialize will be called by every fetched model because they are created from json and collection.set cannot compare json objects with backbone models, it can only compare backbone models with backbone models.
Possible solutions:
Override set to compare json with backbone models.
Override your app.getOrders.get('orders') & server side code to pull down only the changes, or manually remove the already existing objects from the pullled json.
Move your code from initialize to another place for example to collection.add event handler.
Say I have a route setup:
'photos/:id' : 'showPhoto'
and somebody shares the url: www.mysite.com/photos/12345 with a friend.
When their friend clicks on the shared link, showPhoto gets called back with 12345 passed as the id. I cant figure out how to fetch the model from the server, because even when setting its id property and calling fetch(), backbone thinks that the model isNew and so the ajax request url is just /photos instead of /photos/12345:
showPhoto: (id) ->
photo = new models.Photo _id:id
photo.fetch #does a GET to /photos, I would have expected it to request /photos/12345
success: () ->
render photo view etc...
Photo = Backbone.Model.extend
idAttribute: '_id'
urlRoot: '/photos'
The model Photo is usually part of a collection, but in this scenario someone is visiting the site directly and only expects to see data for one photo, so the collection is not instantiated in this state of the app.
Is the solution to load the entire collection of photos and then use collection.getById(id)? This just seems way too inefficient when I just want to load the properties for one model.
if you don't have the model as part of a collection, you have to tell the model the full url manually. it won't auto-append the id to the urlRoot that you've specified. you can specify a function as the urlRoot to do this:
Photo = Backbone.Model.extend({
urlRoot: function(){
if (this.isNew()){
return "/photos";
} else {
return "/photos/" + this.id;
}
}
});
Backbone uses the id of the model to determine if it's new or not, so once you set that, this code should work correctly. if it doesn't, you could always check for an id in the if-statement instead of checking isNew.
You do not need to tell backbone whether or not to append the id the url. Per the documentation: http://backbonejs.org/#Model-fetch, you may simply set the urlRoot to the equivalent of the url in a collection.
Backbone will automatically append the desired id to the url, provided you use one of the following methods:
model.set("id", 5); //After initialized
model = new Backbone.Model({id: 5}); //New model
If you manually set the id in the attributes hash or directly on the model, backbone won't be aware of it.
model.id = 5; //Don't do this!
there's already a similar question: "How do I fetch a single model in Backbone?"
my answer there should work for you (and it's in coffeescript)
also remember to check Backbone Model#url documentation, it's all explained there
I would bootstrap the collection (by rendering the following to the page) with just one model in it like this:
photos = new PhotoCollection();
photos.reset([ #Html.ToJson(Model) ]);
Note that the server side code that I use is ASP.Net MVC so use something specific to your server side architecture. Also note that the square brackets are important as they take your singular model and wrap it in an array.
Hope that's helpful.