I have a doc in couchDB:
{
"id":"avc",
"type":"Property",
"username":"user1",
"password":"password1",
"server":"localhost"
}
I want to write a view that returns a map of all these fields.
The map should look like this: [{"username","user1"},{"password","password1"},{"server","localhost"}]
Here's pseudocode of what I want -
HashMap<String,String> getProperties()
{
HashMap<String,String> propMap;
if (doc.type == 'Property')
{
//read all fields in doc one by one
//get value and add field/value to the map
}
return propMap;
}
I am not sure how to do the portion that I have commented above. Please help.
Note: right now, I want to add username, password and server fields and their values in the map. However, I might keep adding more later on. I want to make sure what I do is extensible.
I considered writing a separate view function for each field. Ex: emit("username",doc.username).
But this may not be the best way to do this. Also needs updates every time I add a new field.
First of all, you have to know:
In CouchDB, you'll index documents inside a view with a key-value pair. So if you index the property username and server, you'll have the following view:
[
{"key": "user1", "value": null},
{"key": "localhost", "value": null}
]
Whenever you edit a view, it invalidates the index so Couch has to rebuild the index. If you were to add new fields to that view, that's something you have to take into account.
If you want to query multiple fields in the same query, all those fields must be in the same view. If it's not a requirement, then you could easily build an index for every field you want.
If you want to index multiple fields in the same view, you could do something like this:
// We define a map function as a function which take a single parameter: The document to index.
(doc) => {
// We iterate over a list of fields to index
["username", "password", "server"].forEach((key, value) => {
// If the document has the field to index, we index it.
if (doc.hasOwnProperty(key)) {
// map(key,value) is the function you call to index your document.
// You don't need to pass a value as you'll be able to get the macthing document by using include_docs=true
map(doc[key], null);
}
});
};
Also, note that Apache Lucene allows to make full-text search and might fit better your needs.
Related
I want to obtain all the fields of a schema in mongoose. Now I am using the following code:
let Client = LisaClient.model('Client', ClientSchema)
let query = Client.findOne({ 'userclient': userclient })
query.select('clientname clientdocument client_id password userclient')
let result = yield query.exec()
But I want all the fields no matter if they are empty. As always, in advance thank you
I'm not sure if you want all fields in a SQL-like way, or if you want them all in a proper MongoDB way.
If you want them in the proper MongoDB way, then just remove the query.select line. That line is saying to only return the fields listed in it.
If you meant in a SQL-like way, MongoDB doesn't work like that. Each document only has the fields you put in when it was inserted. If when you inserted the document, you only gave it certain fields, that document will only have those fields, even if other documents in other collections have different fields.
To determine all available fields in the collection, you'd have to find all the documents, loop through them all and build an object with all the different keys you find.
If you need each document returned to always have the fields that you specify in your select, you'll just have to transform your object once it's returned.
const fields = ['clientname', 'clientdocument', 'client_id', 'password', 'userclient'];
let Client = LisaClient.model('Client', ClientSchema)
let query = Client.findOne({ 'userclient': userclient })
query.select(fields.join(' '))
let result = yield query.exec()
fields.forEach(field => result[field] = result[field]);
That forEach loop will set all the fields you want to either the value in the result (if it was there) or to undefined if it wasn't.
MongoDB is schemaless and does not have tables, each collection can have different types of items.Usually the objects are somehow related or have a common base type.
Retrive invidual records using
db.collectionName.findOne() or db.collectionName.find().pretty()
To get all key names you need to MapReduce
mapReduceKeys = db.runCommand({
"mapreduce": "collection_name",
"map": function() {
for (var key in this) {
emit(key, null);
}
},
"reduce": function(key, stuff) {
return null;
},
"out": "collection_name" + "_keys"
})
Then run distinct on the resulting collection so as to find all the keys
db[mapReduceKeys.result].distinct("_id") //["foo", "bar", "baz", "_id", ...]
I have a form that consists of a number of multi-select fields. Each select has a unique ID, and are named accordingly:
values[foobar1][]
values[foobar2][]
values[foobar3][]
... etc.
This form could potentially contain hundreds of these fields, and so is paged by ajax. The result of that is that there is no guarantee that all records are going to available at once at the front end. Therefore, it is impossible for me to submit the entire form. I do, however, have access to the entire list of records server-side.
My solution to this was to watch for changes in the form fields and, for every field that is changed, store the values in an array to keep track of just the altered field values. So if you make a change to just foobar2, the resulting serialized array that is sent to the server will look like this:
0: Object {
name: "values[foobar2][]"
value: "thevalue1"
},
1: Object {
name: "values[foobar2][]"
value: "thevalue3"
}
So this works fine except for, as you may have guessed, when the select multiple is emptied. No matter what format I use for storing the altered values, be it arraySerialization of each field or as an associative array, when I pass my array to $.param() for the ajax request the resulting serialized string contains no trace of the empty value. So there is no way for the server to determine that the value has been emptied.
Can anyone suggest a way of either passing the data to the server so that the empt(ied) array remains intact, or another way of dealing with the initial problem.
Thanks in advance!
You want to calculate the diff between current and previous state, send the change to the server, and apply it to the data.
You can do so using the JSON patch standard (rfc6902).
JSON Patch is a format for describing changes to a JSON document. It
can be used to avoid sending a whole document when only a part has
changed. When used in combination with the HTTP PATCH method it allows
partial updates for HTTP APIs in a standards compliant way.
To create the diff you can use an NPM module, such as jiff. A diff is set a of patching commands, that can transform a JSON document. For example:
[
{ "op": "replace", "path": "/values/foobar2/", "value": ["thevalue1"] },
{ "op": "remove", "path": "/values/foobar2/"}
]
You send the diff to the server, and then use a server module, such as php-jsonpatch, to apply the patch to the current data on the server.
Create a single object for all select field values you can use localStorage or sessionStorage to store it. Since the form is in a lot of pages and you use ajax to get each select field. Place the selected values of each field in an array. Creating an object like this is the idea.
{
formValues: {
foobar1: {
values: ["thevalue1","thevalue2"]
},
foobar2: {
values: ["thevalue3"]
},
...
foobarN: {
values: []
}
}
}
Every time you update a select vield value or values make sure to update the localStorage saved value. e.g.
var valuesObject = {
formValues: {
foobar1: {
values: ["thevalue1","thevalue2"]
},
foobar2: {
values: ["thevalue3"]
},
foobar3: {
values: []
}
}
}
// Put the object into storage
localStorage.setItem('valuesObject', JSON.stringify(valuesObject));
// Retrieve the object from storage
var valuesObjectA = localStorage.getItem('valuesObject');
//console.log('valuesObject: ', JSON.parse(valuesObjectA));
// post your data
$.post( "ajax.php", valuesObjectA ).done(function( data ) {
alert( "Data Loaded: " + data );
}).fail(function() {
console.log( "error" );
});
Sample fiddle
I've looking for an answer for like 5 five hours straight, hope somebody can help. I have a MongoDb collection results (I'm using mLab) which looks like this:
{
"user":"5818be9c74aaec1824c28626"
"results":[{
"game_id":14578,
"level1":-1,
"level2":-1,
"level3":-1
},
{ ....
}],
{ "user":....
}
}
"user" is a MongoID I save in a previous part of the code, "results" is a record of scores. When an user does a new score, I have to update the score of the corresponding level (I'm using NodeJS).
This is one of the things I've tried so far.
app.get('/levelCompleted/:id/:time', function (request, response) {
var id = request.params.id;
var time = parseInt(request.params.time);
var u= game.getUserById(id);
var k = "results.$.level"+(u.level);
//I build the key to update dinamycally
dbM.collection("results").update(
{user:id,
"results.game_id":u.game_id
//u has its own game_id
},
{$set: {k:time}}
);
...
response.send(...);
});
I've checked the content of every variable and parameter, tried also using $elemMatch and dot notation, set upsert and multi, with no results. I've used an identical command on mongo shell and it has work on the first try.
Update with Mongo Shell
If someone could tell me what I'm doing wrong or point me in the right direction, it would be great.
Thanks
When you use a MongoId as a field in a MongoDB, you can't just pass a string with the id to do the query, you have to identify that string as an ObjectId (Id type in Mongo). Just add a new require in your node.js file.
var ObjectID = require("mongodb").ObjectID;
And use the imported constructor in your update request.
dbM.collection("results").update(
{user:ObjectID(id),...
...
}
I'm using Drywall to create a website.
I'm trying to add a dashboard element to the accounts section of the admin site. The dashboard element is to store an array of dashboards (strings) that the user has access to.
I've managed to successfully add the "dashboards" into the schema and store data in it.
Here's the problem:
I need to be able to add elements to the array. The way the code stands currently replaces the contents of dashboards in the database.
I know I can use $addToSet, but I'm not sure how I'd do that since the fieldsToSet variable is sent to the findByIdAndUpdate() method as a single object.
Here's the snippet of my code:
workflow.on('patchAccount', function() {
var fieldsToSet = {
name: {
first: req.body.first,
middle: req.body.middle,
last: req.body.last,
full: req.body.first +' '+ req.body.last
},
company: req.body.company,
phone: req.body.phone,
zip: req.body.zip,
search: [
req.body.dashboards,
req.body.first,
req.body.middle,
req.body.last,
req.body.company,
req.body.phone,
req.body.zip,
]
};
req.app.db.models.Account.findByIdAndUpdate(req.params.id, fieldsToSet, function(err, account) {
if (err) {
return workflow.emit('exception', err);
}
workflow.outcome.account = account;
return workflow.emit('response');
});
});
Here's a link to the original file: (lines 184-203)
Thanks!
fieldsToSet is a bad name (at least misleading in this case), the parameter is actually update which can take $actions like $addToSet
I don't think you want to set (only) the search field with dashboards. I'm guessing that field is used to index users for a search. So you'll probably wind up doing something like this:
fieldsToSet = {
....all the regular stuff,
$addToSet: {dashboard: req.body.dashboardToAdd}
//I'm not sure that you can add multiple values at once
}
Since this is setting all of the values each time I'm not sure you actually will want to add single dashboard items. Instead you might want to get the full set of dashboards the user has and set the whole array again anyway (what if they removed one?)
fieldsToSet = {
....all the regular stuff,
dashboards: req.body.dashboards
//In this case you'd want to make sure dashboards is an appropriate array
}
I've seen other posts in this site regarding the same issue and I've tried the solutions given. I've also visited the links that may offer a solution but I'm still stuck with the same error.
I'm using DOJO and something as simple as this won't even work
myStore.newItem({id: 'test', otherfield: 'otherinfohere'});
myStore.save();
Supposedly the "newItem() was not passed an identity for the new item" error appears when you haven't provided an identifier for the new item, which i have.
The whole purpose of this (Just in case anyone can provide a good idea or has done something similar before) is that i want to create a data grid that shows info from a particular store. The problem is, that in that store all the items may not have the same structure. For instance:
I may have a store that looks like this
{identifier: 'id',
label: 'name',
items: [
{ id:'1', name:'Ecuador', capital:'Quito' },
{ id:'2', name:'Egypt', capital:'Cairo' },
{ id:'3', name:'El Salvador', capital:'San Salvador' , additionalField: 'otherinfohere'},
{ abbr:'gq', name:'Equatorial Guinea', capital:'Malabo', additionalField: 'otherinfohere'},
]}
This is possible because I'm the one constructing the store in a Spring Controller (I'm also using the Spring Framework) from information I have locally stored in a Berkeley DB. So what i need is a data grid with a dynamic layout because I don't want blank spaces to show in the view in the rows with lesser amount of fields, and i need to show all the info in the store at the same time, but i don't know how to do this.
I thought of doing it by creating a simple layout of only 1 field. In it I would load data from a store i create dynamically at runtime. The data in the store would be composed of HTML combined with the values coming from the original store so I could obtain something like this, which is inside an attribute of a JavaScript Object and let the browser parse it for me:
<div><span>id: originalID </span>....</div>
This of course is a simple example, the html layout i'm looking for is far more complicated, but i think that passing it as a string to an object might do the trick.
The problem is that i don't even know if that idea will work because i get that error whenever i try to add values to my secondary store.
rdb.modules.monitor.historicStore.fetch({onComplete: function(items, request){
for (var i = 0; i < items.length; i++){
var item = items[i];
var obj = new Object();
obj.id = rdb.modules.monitor.historicStore.getValue(item, "id");;
var html = "<div><span>";
html += rdb.modules.monitor.historicStore.getValue(item, "sql");
html += "</span></div>";
obj.html = html;
myStore.store.newItem(obj);
}
}});
In this context "historicStore" refers to the JSON store that has the values that i need to convert and add to "myStore" after i added some HTML.
I hope you got the main idea of what I'm trying to do. If anyone can help me we either of these problems i would really appreciate it. Thanks in advance
For the issue regarding store:-
"id" is mandatory for a store, if it is going to be used for a grid(datagrid, EnhancedGrid, etc. whatever). The items are handled only on basis of "id" attribute by the grid data structures.
Usually, id can be a loop variable/ auto incrementation, to avoid any cases like you have said. Before adding the store to the grid, ensure that all items have the id attribute. You can write a function which will loop through each item and check for this, else add an auto-incrementing value for the id attribute of that item.