Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add: SitesManager getIdFromSite() #1261

Closed
anonymous-matomo-user opened this issue Mar 30, 2010 · 10 comments
Closed

add: SitesManager getIdFromSite() #1261

anonymous-matomo-user opened this issue Mar 30, 2010 · 10 comments
Assignees
Labels
Enhancement For new feature suggestions that enhance Matomo's capabilities or add a new report, new API etc.
Milestone

Comments

@anonymous-matomo-user
Copy link

For plugins/SitesManager/API.php, companion function to getSiteFromId()

This should search the database for a URL and return the ID of that site. This is extremely useful in keeping two databases synced (WPMU and Piwik in my case)

Matthieu says to remove the viewAccess check, but I'm only following convention from getSiteFromId(). Feel free to remove.

Sorry I don't have time to submit a proper patch.

    /**
     * Returns the website information : id
     * 
     * @exception if the site website doesn't exist or the user doesn't have access to it
     * @return string
     */
    public function getIdFromSite( $site_url )
    {
        $site_url = $this->removeTrailingSlash($site_url);

        $id = Zend_Registry::get('db')->fetchRow(
                    "SELECT Idsite FROM ".Piwik::prefixTable("site")." WHERE main_url = ?".
                    "UNION SELECT Idsite FROM ".Piwik::prefixTable("site_url")." WHERE url = ?", array($site_url, $site_url));

        $id = isset($id['Idsite'])?$id['Idsite']:false;

        if ($id) { Piwik::checkUserHasViewAccess( $id ); }

        return $id;
    }
@robocoder
Copy link
Contributor

vote: stick with convention and keep the view access check.

@anonymous-matomo-user
Copy link
Author

In light of being told that URLs may have multiple IDs, this should be changed to return an array:

 $id = isset($id['Idsite'])?$id['Idsite']:$id; ```

Assuming Zend_Registry::get returns multiple rows?

Also, this line:

if ($id) { Piwik::checkUserHasViewAccess( $id ); } ```

would need to iterate over the IDs array on multiple matches and make sure each had access.

@mattab
Copy link
Member

mattab commented Mar 31, 2010

I didn't say to remove the access check (of course!). My point was that this code is invalid because it will error out if one other websites (that you don't have access to) has the URL you are requesting. Only websites that you have permissions to view should be returned.

oooa, the Piwik::checkUserHasViewAccess function also accepts an array of IDs

did you test this code? I see it reads "Idsite" when the field name is idsite..

@robocoder
Copy link
Contributor

Instead of checkUserHasViewAccess ... can you use the array of ids returned from getSitesIdWithAtLeastViewAccess() in the WHERE clause? i.e., idsite IN (?)

@mattab
Copy link
Member

mattab commented Mar 31, 2010

probably, even though we want to avoid this as it doesn't scale (in the use case you have 2000 websites)

@robocoder
Copy link
Contributor

The alternative is a subquery on the access table,

WHERE idsite IN (SELECT idsite FROM access WHERE user = ?)

@anonymous-matomo-user
Copy link
Author

Idsite is capitalized because the select, I guess. Code does work as-is!

@robocoder
Copy link
Contributor

AFAICS, comment:3 (comment:6 ?) and unit tests are still todo items.

@robocoder
Copy link
Contributor

(In [2061]) fixes #1261 - SitesManager: add getSitesIdFromSiteUrl( $url ) to API; add unit test

@robocoder
Copy link
Contributor

(In [2062]) refs #1261 - add unit tests for more complete test coverage

This issue was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Enhancement For new feature suggestions that enhance Matomo's capabilities or add a new report, new API etc.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants