Develop Reference

Query firestore DB with array-contains and in (firebase 9)

In Firebase (v. 9), I have this firestore DB collection named "users". Each user has these fields: "gender" (string: 'male' or 'female'), "age" (number) and "language" (string: 'en-EN' or 'fr-FR' or 'es-ES' or 'de-DE' ).
From a filter checkbox menu, a user can select the languages then execute a query, get the result and than applied another filter and get another result.
For example:
I check, from the language menu "English" and "French" --> get the result, for example 3 users (2 female and 1 male). Then, from the gender menu, I check "male" --> get the result: just that one male user from the previous query result.
But a user can also do the first query for the language and then, in the second one, check both 'male' and 'female'.
I'm trying to do the query combining 'array-contains' and 'in' operator but I have no luck.
The query
const q = query(
collection(db, 'users'),
where('gender', 'array-contains', ['male', 'female']),
where('language', 'in', ['en-EN', 'es-ES']),
where('age', '>', 14),
where('age', '<', 40)
);
EDIT: For that query I changed my DB structure: gender has become an array but with 'array-contains' I can't do:
where('gender', 'array-contains', ['male', 'female'])
It must be something like that:
where('gender', 'array-contains', 'male')
but I want to check for both gender.
What could solve my problem is doing two queries with 'in' operator but I can't do that. (Firebase allows me to have only 1 'in' operator in the query).
My goal is, for example, to get every users in the DB that speak English or French, both male or female and with an age between 14 and 40. Is that the correct way to do this? How can I do the first query for the language and then, do another query starting from that result in order to avoid redoing the first query (the language) when I query for the gender and then when I query for the age? I also create indexes as Firebase suggested me to do, but I still get an empty array.
I was reading the firebase 'Query limitation' from the doc:
Cloud Firestore provides limited support for logical OR queries. The in, and array-contains-any operators support a logical OR of up to 10 equality (==) or array-contains conditions on a single field. For other cases, create a separate query for each OR condition and merge the query results in your app.
In a compound query, range (<, <=, >, >=) and not equals (!=, not-in) comparisons must all filter on the same field.
You can use at most one array-contains clause per query. You can't combine array-contains with array-contains-any.
You can use at most one in, not-in, or array-contains-any clause per query. You can't combine in , not-in, and array-contains-any in the same query.
You can't order your query by a field included in an equality (==) or in clause.
The sum of filters, sort orders, and parent document path (1 for a subcollection, 0 for a root collection) in a query cannot exceed 100.
That says I can combine the 'in' operator only with 'array-contains'. It also says, that "for other cases, create a separate query for each OR condition and merge the query results in your app" but I can't find any example on how to do that.
I read an answer here > Firebase Firestore - Multiple array-contains in a compound query where someone suggest to change the structure of the data to query, from an array to a map and then query with the equal operator:
where('field.name1', '==', true),
where('field.name2', '==', true)
I still have no luck with this.
Edit2: I guess the only thing I could do, is to execute 2 different queries, get the results in two different arrays and than do whatever logic I need to implement using js..I mean, not with firebase query operator. Can someone guide me through the process?
Any help is appreciated.
Thank you

Google Cloud Firestore only allows one in condition per query. You'll need to do the second one in JavaScript processing the results. Probably, the best way you can do is to get the result from the original query and process the result using Javascript. See sample code below:
const q = query(
collection(db, 'users'),
where('language', 'in', ['en-EN', 'es-ES']),
where('age', '>', 14),
where('age', '<', 40)
);
// Pass the data from the checkboxes.
// Can be 'male', 'female', or ('male' and 'female')
const gender = ['male', 'female'];
let array = [];
const snapshot = await getDocs(q);
snapshot.forEach((doc) => {
if (gender.includes(doc.data().gender)) {
array.push(doc.data());
}
});
console.log(array);
The above code will return the processed result whatever you pass on the gender variable. You could do it vice-versa, if you want to query the gender first then just interchange the query and variables.
Another option is to have a compound string, for example:
Checked:
Male
Female
en_EN
en_ES
Compound strings will be ['en_male', 'en_female', 'es_male', 'es_female']. You can query this by only one in statement. See sample code below:
// Combined data passed from the checkboxes.
// Can only be one and up to 10 comparison values.
const compound = ['en_male', 'en_female', 'es_male', 'es_female'];
const q = query(
collection(db, 'users'),
where('compound', 'in', compound),
where('age', '>', 14),
where('age', '<', 40)
);
const snapshot = await getDocs(q);
snapshot.forEach((doc) => {
console.log(doc.id, doc.data());
});
The downside of this approach is you can only have up to 10 comparison values for the in operator.
For more relevant information, you may check this documentation.

How to query two values inside an array in Firebase firestore, where one value is indexed after the other one?

Is there any way to query through an array of string values in firebase firestore which should contain two strings a and b BUT string b has to be listed after string a?
Example:
I have two string values I would like to query for:
a = "12345"
b = "67890"
And I have stored multiple documents in firebase firestore which could look like this:
document1 = {
id: "randomId1",
// ...other stuff
array: ["12345","345", "67890"]
}
document2 = {
id: "randomId2",
// ...other stuff
array: ["67890","345","12345"]
}
Now I only want to get document1 in my query results, because value b is listed after value a in the array section. How can I do this?

There is no way to do such queries in firestore, you can only define if it has this value or not.
Possible solutions:
Store a boolean inside your document which defines if this doc suits your needs.
Load all documents that have both values and check for their order on the client side.
Probably you should restructure your database, it is usually help in such cases.

Javascript apply .join() to item in object collection only if not undefined/empty/null?

In Javascript I have a collection of objects, whose values I'm storing in variable
var filters = {
BeginDate: $("#BeginDateRange").val(),
EndDate: $("#EndDateRange").val(),
ListOfCodes: $("#ListOfCodes").val(),
//ListOfCodes: $("#ListOfCodes").val().join(),
...
}
Based on where I use the collection, some of its objects remain 'undefined', and it is intended.
ListOfCodes above is an array of string values, and I want to pass it to the binder as a single comma-separated string (e.g ["1"], ["2"] -> "1,2")
I was able to make a use of .join(), and it worked successfully. However, I found later that the code will crash if the .join() does not have a value to join.
Is there a way to apply .join() INSIDE the collection to the variable ONLY if it has value? Something like
var filters = {
BeginDate: $("#BeginDateRange").val(),
EndDate: $("#EndDateRange").val(),
ListOfCodes: if( $("#ListOfCodes").val() )
{$("#ListOfCodes").val().join()}
else
{$("#ListOfCodes").val()} //value remains undefined
,
...
}
EDIT: I ask about the possibility of applying .join() method inside the collection, not checking for empty values.

Just moving this as an answer.
What about a ternary statement?
ListOfCodes: ($("#ListOfCodes").val()) ? $("#ListOfCodes").val().join() : null

Mongodb Node.js driver embedded arrays query [duplicate]

I have a problem when querying mongoDB with nested objects notation:
db.messages.find( { headers : { From: "reservations#marriott.com" } } ).count()
0
db.messages.find( { 'headers.From': "reservations#marriott.com" } ).count()
5
I can't see what I am doing wrong. I am expecting nested object notation to return the same result as the dot notation query. Where am I wrong?

db.messages.find( { headers : { From: "reservations#marriott.com" } } )
This queries for documents where headers equals { From: ... }, i.e. contains no other fields.
db.messages.find( { 'headers.From': "reservations#marriott.com" } )
This only looks at the headers.From field, not affected by other fields contained in, or missing from, headers.
Dot-notation docs

Since there is a lot of confusion about queries MongoDB collection with sub-documents, I thought its worth to explain the above answers with examples:
First I have inserted only two objects in the collection namely: message as:
> db.messages.find().pretty()
{
"_id" : ObjectId("5cce8e417d2e7b3fe9c93c32"),
"headers" : {
"From" : "reservations#marriott.com"
}
}
{
"_id" : ObjectId("5cce8eb97d2e7b3fe9c93c33"),
"headers" : {
"From" : "reservations#marriott.com",
"To" : "kprasad.iitd#gmail.com"
}
}
>
So what is the result of query: db.messages.find({headers: {From: "reservations#marriott.com"} }).count()
It should be one because these queries for documents where headers equal to the object {From: "reservations#marriott.com"}, only i.e. contains no other fields or we should specify the entire sub-document as the value of a field.
So as per the answer from #Edmondo1984
Equality matches within sub-documents select documents if the subdocument matches exactly the specified sub-document, including the field order.
From the above statements, what is the below query result should be?
> db.messages.find({headers: {To: "kprasad.iitd#gmail.com", From: "reservations#marriott.com"} }).count()
0
And what if we will change the order of From and To i.e same as sub-documents of second documents?
> db.messages.find({headers: {From: "reservations#marriott.com", To: "kprasad.iitd#gmail.com"} }).count()
1
so, it matches exactly the specified sub-document, including the field order.
For using dot operator, I think it is very clear for every one. Let's see the result of below query:
> db.messages.find( { 'headers.From': "reservations#marriott.com" } ).count()
2
I hope these explanations with the above example will make someone more clarity on find query with sub-documents.

The two query mechanism work in different ways, as suggested in the docs at the section Subdocuments:
When the field holds an embedded document (i.e, subdocument), you can either specify the entire subdocument as the value of a field, or “reach into” the subdocument using dot notation, to specify values for individual fields in the subdocument:
Equality matches within subdocuments select documents if the subdocument matches exactly the specified subdocument, including the field order.
In the following example, the query matches all documents where the value of the field producer is a subdocument that contains only the field company with the value 'ABC123' and the field address with the value '123 Street', in the exact order:
db.inventory.find( {
producer: {
company: 'ABC123',
address: '123 Street'
}
});

Firebase OrderByKey with startAt and endAt giving wrong results

I have 3 objects with the keys as it looks like this:
They are in format of YYYYMMDD. I am trying to get data of a month. But I am not getting the desired output.
When I query it like this:
var ref = db.child("-KPXECP6a1pXaM4gEYe0");
ref.orderByKey().startAt("20160901").once("value", function (snapshot) {
console.log("objects: " + snapshot.numChildren());
snapshot.forEach(function(childSnapshot) {
console.log(childSnapshot.key);
});
});
I get the following output:
objects: 3
20160822-KPl446bbdlaiQx6BOPL
20160901-KPl48ID2FuT3tAVf4DW
20160902-KPl4Fr4O28VpsIkB70Z
When I query this along with endAt:
ref.orderByKey().startAt("20160901").endAt("20160932").once("value", function (snapshot) {
console.log("objects: " + snapshot.numChildren());
snapshot.forEach(function(childSnapshot) {
console.log(childSnapshot.key);
});
});
I get this:
objects: 0
If I use ~ sign at the end,
ref.orderByKey().startAt("20160901").endAt("20160932~").once("value", function (snapshot) {
console.log("objects: " + snapshot.numChildren());
snapshot.forEach(function(childSnapshot) {
console.log(childSnapshot.key);
});
});
I get the output:
objects: 3
20160822-KPl446bbdlaiQx6BOPL
20160901-KPl48ID2FuT3tAVf4DW
20160902-KPl4Fr4O28VpsIkB70Z
Is there anything I am missing here?

Wow... this took some time to dig up. Thanks for the jsfiddle, that helped a lot.
TL;DR: ensure that you always have a non-numeric character in your search criteria, e.g. ref.orderByKey().startAt("20160901-").endAt("20160931~").
Longer explanation
In Firebase all keys are stored as strings. But we make it possible for developers to store arrays in the database. In order to allow that we store the array indices as string properties. So ref.set(["First", "Second", "Third"]) is actually stored as:
"0": "First"
"1": "Second"
"2": "Third"
When you get the data back from Firebase, it'll convert this into an array again. But it is important for your current use-case to understand that it is stored as key-value pairs with string keys.
When you execute a query, Firebase tries to detect whether you're querying a numeric range. When it thinks that is your intent, it converts the arguments into numbers and queries against the numeric conversion of the keys on the server.
In your case since you are querying on only a numeric value, it will switch to this numeric query mode. But since your keys are actually all strings, nothing will match.
For this reason I'd recommend that you prefix keys with a constant string. Any valid character will do, I used a - in my tests. This will fool our "is it an array?" check and everything will work the way you want it.
The quicker fix is to ensure that your conditions are non-convertible to a number. In the first snippet I did this by adding a very low range ASCII character to the startAt() and a very high ASCII character to endAt().
Both of these are workarounds for the way Firebase deals with arrays. Unfortunately the API doesn't have a simple way to handle it and requires such a workaround.