I'm currently building an expense-tracker app and I want the transactions collection to have a category field. The category field should be of type "reference" and it should refer to another collection "categories". I tried this, but when I use the addDoc function the field category is stored as a map. And to be honest: It makes sense based on my code, but I don't know how to fix it.
Does anyone know how i can change that code, so the category is stored as a reference field in the firestore database?
const transaction = { category: {}, description: "", date: "", price: 0, userId: null} as Transaction
await addDoc(collection(db, "transactions"), {
...inputValues,
category: {
...selectedOption
},
userId: user?.uid,
})
I am building an education application and I am trying to add/update a field which is an array of objects with addToSet from a javascript array, and if the object already exists (matched with objectId) I want to update the already existing object's array (addToSet) and change another field of that same object.
My model looks like this (simplified):
const course = new Schema(
{
events: [
{
type: Schema.Types.ObjectId,
ref: 'event'
}
],
students: [
{
user: {
type: Schema.Types.ObjectId,
ref: 'user'
},
status: {
type: String,
enum: ['notBooked', 'booked', 'attended', 'completed']
},
events: [
{
type: Schema.Types.ObjectId,
ref: 'event'
}
]
}
],
});
And ideally I would like to use an updateOne query to both addToSet to the course's list of events, while also updating the students list.
Currently I am using this code to accomplish my updates by first finding the course and then using javascript to update it, which works:
const studentsToAdd = this.attendees.map((attendee) => ({
user: attendee._id,
status: 'booked',
events: [this._id]
}));
const studentIds = studentsToAdd.map((student) => student.user);
const course = await courseModel.findById(this.course);
console.log(studentIds);
course.events.push(this._id);
course.students.forEach((student) => {
if (studentIds.some((s) => s.equals(student.user))) {
student.events.push(this._id);
student.status = 'booked';
studentsToAdd.splice(studentsToAdd.indexOf(studentsToAdd.find((s) => s.user.equals(student.user))), 1);
}
});
course.students.push(...studentsToAdd);
course.save();
However I am curious if it is possible to solve this using a single updateOne on the courseModel schema.
This is part of a mongoose middleware function, and "this" references an event object, which has its own _id, attendees of the event, and the course ID (named course).
The goal is to add the student object part of studentsToAdd to the students array of the course IF the student does not exist (signified by user being a reference by objectId), and if the student already exists then I want to add the eventId (this._id) to the events array for that particular student and set status for that student to "booked".
Is this possible? I have tried many iterations using $cond, $elemmatch, "students.$[]" and so forth but I am quite new to mongodb and am unsure how to go about this.
I'm currently trying Firestore, and I'm stuck at something very simple: "updating an array (aka a subdocument)".
My DB structure is super simple. For example:
proprietary: "John Doe",
sharedWith:
[
{who: "first#test.com", when:timestamp},
{who: "another#test.com", when:timestamp},
],
I'm trying (without success) to push new records into shareWith array of objects.
I've tried:
// With SET
firebase.firestore()
.collection('proprietary')
.doc(docID)
.set(
{ sharedWith: [{ who: "third#test.com", when: new Date() }] },
{ merge: true }
)
// With UPDATE
firebase.firestore()
.collection('proprietary')
.doc(docID)
.update({ sharedWith: [{ who: "third#test.com", when: new Date() }] })
None works. These queries overwrite my array.
The answer might be simple, but I could'nt find it...
Firestore now has two functions that allow you to update an array without re-writing the entire thing.
Link: https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/manage-data/add-data, specifically https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/manage-data/add-data#update_elements_in_an_array
Update elements in an array
If your document contains an array field, you can use arrayUnion() and
arrayRemove() to add and remove elements. arrayUnion() adds elements
to an array but only elements not already present. arrayRemove()
removes all instances of each given element.
Edit 08/13/2018: There is now support for native array operations in Cloud Firestore. See Doug's answer below.
There is currently no way to update a single array element (or add/remove a single element) in Cloud Firestore.
This code here:
firebase.firestore()
.collection('proprietary')
.doc(docID)
.set(
{ sharedWith: [{ who: "third#test.com", when: new Date() }] },
{ merge: true }
)
This says to set the document at proprietary/docID such that sharedWith = [{ who: "third#test.com", when: new Date() } but to not affect any existing document properties. It's very similar to the update() call you provided however the set() call with create the document if it does not exist while the update() call will fail.
So you have two options to achieve what you want.
Option 1 - Set the whole array
Call set() with the entire contents of the array, which will require reading the current data from the DB first. If you're concerned about concurrent updates you can do all of this in a transaction.
Option 2 - Use a subcollection
You could make sharedWith a subcollection of the main document. Then
adding a single item would look like this:
firebase.firestore()
.collection('proprietary')
.doc(docID)
.collection('sharedWith')
.add({ who: "third#test.com", when: new Date() })
Of course this comes with new limitations. You would not be able to query
documents based on who they are shared with, nor would you be able to
get the doc and all of the sharedWith data in a single operation.
Here is the latest example from the Firestore documentation:
firebase.firestore.FieldValue.ArrayUnion
var washingtonRef = db.collection("cities").doc("DC");
// Atomically add a new region to the "regions" array field.
washingtonRef.update({
regions: firebase.firestore.FieldValue.arrayUnion("greater_virginia")
});
// Atomically remove a region from the "regions" array field.
washingtonRef.update({
regions: firebase.firestore.FieldValue.arrayRemove("east_coast")
});
You can use a transaction (https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/manage-data/transactions) to get the array, push onto it and then update the document:
const booking = { some: "data" };
const userRef = this.db.collection("users").doc(userId);
this.db.runTransaction(transaction => {
// This code may get re-run multiple times if there are conflicts.
return transaction.get(userRef).then(doc => {
if (!doc.data().bookings) {
transaction.set({
bookings: [booking]
});
} else {
const bookings = doc.data().bookings;
bookings.push(booking);
transaction.update(userRef, { bookings: bookings });
}
});
}).then(function () {
console.log("Transaction successfully committed!");
}).catch(function (error) {
console.log("Transaction failed: ", error);
});
Sorry Late to party but Firestore solved it way back in aug 2018 so If you still looking for that here it is all issues solved with regards to arrays.
https://firebase.googleblog.com/2018/08/better-arrays-in-cloud-firestore.htmlOfficial blog post
array-contains, arrayRemove, arrayUnion for checking, removing and updating arrays. Hope it helps.
To build on Sam Stern's answer, there is also a 3rd option which made things easier for me and that is using what Google call a Map, which is essentially a dictionary.
I think a dictionary is far better for the use case you're describing. I usually use arrays for stuff that isn't really updated too much, so they are more or less static. But for stuff that gets written a lot, specifically values that need to be updated for fields that are linked to something else in the database, dictionaries prove to be much easier to maintain and work with.
So for your specific case, the DB structure would look like this:
proprietary: "John Doe"
sharedWith:{
whoEmail1: {when: timestamp},
whoEmail2: {when: timestamp}
}
This will allow you to do the following:
var whoEmail = 'first#test.com';
var sharedObject = {};
sharedObject['sharedWith.' + whoEmail + '.when'] = new Date();
sharedObject['merge'] = true;
firebase.firestore()
.collection('proprietary')
.doc(docID)
.update(sharedObject);
The reason for defining the object as a variable is that using 'sharedWith.' + whoEmail + '.when' directly in the set method will result in an error, at least when using it in a Node.js cloud function.
#Edit (add explanation :) )
say you have an array you want to update your existing firestore document field with. You can use set(yourData, {merge: true} ) passing setOptions(second param in set function) with {merge: true} is must in order to merge the changes instead of overwriting. here is what the official documentation says about it
An options object that configures the behavior of set() calls in DocumentReference, WriteBatch, and Transaction. These calls can be configured to perform granular merges instead of overwriting the target documents in their entirety by providing a SetOptions with merge: true.
you can use this
const yourNewArray = [{who: "first#test.com", when:timestamp}
{who: "another#test.com", when:timestamp}]
collectionRef.doc(docId).set(
{
proprietary: "jhon",
sharedWith: firebase.firestore.FieldValue.arrayUnion(...yourNewArray),
},
{ merge: true },
);
hope this helps :)
addToCart(docId: string, prodId: string): Promise<void> {
return this.baseAngularFirestore.collection('carts').doc(docId).update({
products:
firestore.FieldValue.arrayUnion({
productId: prodId,
qty: 1
}),
});
}
i know this is really old, but to help people newbies with the issue
firebase V9 provides a solution using the arrayUnion and arrayRemove
await updateDoc(documentRef, {
proprietary: arrayUnion( { sharedWith: [{ who: "third#test.com", when: new Date() }] }
});
check this out for more explanation
Other than the answers mentioned above. This will do it.
Using Angular 5 and AngularFire2. or use firebase.firestore() instead of this.afs
// say you have have the following object and
// database structure as you mentioned in your post
data = { who: "third#test.com", when: new Date() };
...othercode
addSharedWith(data) {
const postDocRef = this.afs.collection('posts').doc('docID');
postDocRef.subscribe( post => {
// Grab the existing sharedWith Array
// If post.sharedWith doesn`t exsit initiated with empty array
const foo = { 'sharedWith' : post.sharedWith || []};
// Grab the existing sharedWith Array
foo['sharedWith'].push(data);
// pass updated to fireStore
postsDocRef.update(foo);
// using .set() will overwrite everything
// .update will only update existing values,
// so we initiated sharedWith with empty array
});
}
We can use arrayUnion({}) method to achive this.
Try this:
collectionRef.doc(ID).update({
sharedWith: admin.firestore.FieldValue.arrayUnion({
who: "first#test.com",
when: new Date()
})
});
Documentation can find here: https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/manage-data/add-data#update_elements_in_an_array
Consider John Doe a document rather than a collection
Give it a collection of things and thingsSharedWithOthers
Then you can map and query John Doe's shared things in that parallel thingsSharedWithOthers collection.
proprietary: "John Doe"(a document)
things(collection of John's things documents)
thingsSharedWithOthers(collection of John's things being shared with others):
[thingId]:
{who: "first#test.com", when:timestamp}
{who: "another#test.com", when:timestamp}
then set thingsSharedWithOthers
firebase.firestore()
.collection('thingsSharedWithOthers')
.set(
{ [thingId]:{ who: "third#test.com", when: new Date() } },
{ merge: true }
)
If You want to Update an array in a firebase document.
You can do this.
var documentRef = db.collection("Your collection name").doc("Your doc name")
documentRef.update({
yourArrayName: firebase.firestore.FieldValue.arrayUnion("The Value you want to enter")});
Although firebase.firestore.FieldValue.arrayUnion() provides the solution for array update in firestore, at the same time it is required to use {merge:true}. If you do not use {merge:true} it will delete all other fields in the document while updating with the new value. Here is the working code for updating array without loosing data in the reference document with .set() method:
const docRef = firebase.firestore().collection("your_collection_name").doc("your_doc_id");
docRef.set({yourArrayField: firebase.firestore.FieldValue.arrayUnion("value_to_add")}, {merge:true});
If anybody is looking for Java firestore sdk solution to add items in array field:
List<String> list = java.util.Arrays.asList("A", "B");
Object[] fieldsToUpdate = list.toArray();
DocumentReference docRef = getCollection().document("docId");
docRef.update(fieldName, FieldValue.arrayUnion(fieldsToUpdate));
To delete items from array user: FieldValue.arrayRemove()
If the document contains a nested object in the form of an array, .dot notation can be used to reference and update nested fields.
Node.js example:
const users = {
name: 'Tom',
surname: 'Smith',
favorites: {
sport: 'tennis',
color: 'red',
subject: 'math'
}
};
const update = await db.collection('users').doc('Tom').update({
'favorites.sport': 'snowboard'
});
or Android sdk example:
db.collection("users").document("Tom")
.update(
'favorites.sport': 'snowboard'
);
There is a simple hack in firestore:
use path with "." as property name:
propertyname.arraysubname.${id}:
db.collection("collection")
.doc("docId")
.update({arrayOfObj: fieldValue.arrayUnion({...item})})
I'm creating a like functionality for my app using MongoDB. I recently stumbled upon a problem.
My code for the liking:
async function like(articleId, userId) {
const db = await makeDb();
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
const result = db.collection(collectionName).findOneAndUpdate(
{ articleId: ObjectID(articleId) },
{
$setOnInsert: {
articleId: ObjectID(articleId),
creationDate: new Date()
},
$addToSet: { likes: ObjectID(userId) }
},
{ upsert: true }
);
resolve(result);
});
What it does:
If there is no document in the collection create one and fill in all the fields
If a document exists update only the likes array with a new userID
This works as expected and there are no problems, thanks to $addToSet I don't have any duplicates etc.
However after the above code gets executed and the result is returned I need to do some additional stuff and for it to work I need to know if Mongos $addToSet did change anything.
So in short:
if a new userId has been added to the likes array I want to do something
if the userId is already in the likes array and the $addToSet didnt change anything I don't want to take any action.
Is there a way to distinguish if the $addToSet did something?
The current console.log() of the result looks like this:
{
lastErrorObject: { n: 1, updatedExisting: true },
value: { _id: 5e2c47c57bb5183d80dce14f,
articleId: 5da4d1365217baf52fbcd76a,
creationDate: 2020-01-25T13:51:01.928Z,
likes: [ 5d750b677d8edfc08af8a527 ]
},
ok: 1
}
The one thing that comes to my mind (but is very bad performance-wise) is to compare the likes array before the update if it contains the userID with javascript includes method.
Any better ideas?
I found the solution!
99% of the credit goes to Neil Lunn for this answer:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/44994382/2175228
It brought me on the right track. I ditched the findOneAndUpdate method in favor of the updateOne method. The query parameters etc. everything stayed the same, only the method name changed and obviously the result type of this method.
The problem with the updateOne method is that it does not return the object that was updated (or the old one). But it does return the upsertedId which is the only thing I need in my situation.
So in the end what You get is a very long CommandResult object which starts with:
CommandResult {
result: { n: 1, nModified: 0, ok: 1 },
(...)
}
but when I looked very closely I noticed that the object has exactly those fields that I needed the whole time:
modifiedCount: 0,
upsertedId: null, // if object was inserted, this field will contain it's ID
upsertedCount: 0,
matchedCount: 1
So what You need to do is just take the parts that You need from the CommandResult object and just proceed ;)
My code after the changes:
async function like(articleId, userId) {
const db = await makeDb();
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
db.collection(collectionName)
.updateOne(
{ articleId: ObjectID(articleId) },
{
$setOnInsert: {
articleId: ObjectID(articleId),
creationDate: new Date()
},
$addToSet: { likes: ObjectID(userId) }
},
{ upsert: true }
)
.then(data => {
// wrap the content that You need
const result = {
upsertedId: data.upsertedId,
upsertedCount: data.upsertedCount,
modifiedCount: data.modifiedCount
};
resolve(result);
});
});
}
Hopefully this answer will help someone with a similar problem in the future :)
I'm using normalizr util to process API response based on non-ids model. As I know, typically normalizr works with ids model, but maybe there is a some way to generate ids "on the go"?
My API response example:
```
// input data:
const inputData = {
doctors: [
{
name: Jon,
post: chief
},
{
name: Marta,
post: nurse
},
//....
}
// expected output data:
const outputData = {
entities: {
nameCards : {
uniqueID_0: { id: uniqueID_0, name: Jon, post: uniqueID_3 },
uniqueID_1: { id: uniqueID_1, name: Marta, post: uniqueID_4 }
},
positions: {
uniqueID_3: { id: uniqueID_3, post: chief },
uniqueID_4: { id: uniqueID_4, post: nurse }
}
},
result: uniqueID_0
}
```
P.S.
I heard from someone about generating IDs "by the hood" in normalizr for such cases as my, but I did found such solution.
As mentioned in this issue:
Normalizr is never going to be able to generate unique IDs for you. We
don't do any memoization or anything internally, as that would be
unnecessary for most people.
Your working solution is okay, but will fail if you receive one of
these entities again later from another API endpoint.
My recommendation would be to find something that's constant and
unique on your entities and use that as something to generate unique
IDs from.
And then, as mentioned in the docs, you need to set idAttribute to replace 'id' with another key:
const data = { id_str: '123', url: 'https://twitter.com', user: { id_str: '456', name: 'Jimmy' } };
const user = new schema.Entity('users', {}, { idAttribute: 'id_str' });
const tweet = new schema.Entity('tweets', { user: user }, {
idAttribute: 'id_str',
// Apply everything from entityB over entityA, except for "favorites"
mergeStrategy: (entityA, entityB) => ({
...entityA,
...entityB,
favorites: entityA.favorites
}),
// Remove the URL field from the entity
processStrategy: (entity) => omit(entity, 'url')
});
const normalizedData = normalize(data, tweet);
EDIT
You can always provide unique id's using external lib or by hand:
inputData.doctors = inputData.doctors.map((doc, idx) => ({
...doc,
id: `doctor_${idx}`
}))
Have a processStrategy which is basically a function and in that function assign your id's there, ie. value.id = uuid(). Visit the link below to see an example https://github.com/paularmstrong/normalizr/issues/256