I would like to have a document which has sub document, which looks like below:
course: {
id,
name,
sections: {
section: {
id,
name
}
}
}
How do i create this model in Loopback?
I don't want to create a separate model for section, because i want to model it as a sub document.
Also, provide some information about how to get the sub document from the sub document id.
for example: if i want to find details about section with id = 2, it should not take in details about course and provide details just about the section.
You can use embedded models.
Here is an example Course.json config using Course embedsMany Section relation.
Please note that you don't need to declare the Section model anywhere else, since it's embedded inside Course.
{
"name": "Course",
"base": "PersistedModel",
"idInjection": true,
"properties": {
"name": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"relations": {
"emails": {
"type": "embedsMany",
"model": "Section",
"property": "name",
"options": {
"forceId": true,
}
}
...
}
Then, to add emails address to a course programmatically, first find an instance of a course then use its generated email property. Again, this is documented
var id = 0;
Course.findById(id, function(err,course) {
course.emails.add({name: 'foo#bar.com'}, function(err, ..) {
//...
}
}
Related
I'm trying to increment one value in firebase store using rest api following this guide https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/reference/rest/v1beta1/projects.databases.documents/commit
I'm trying to make the request using the form given at this documentation.
Here's my path to the document
/hindiscript-likes/kof97lbQ1IuuvgCHBfOh
where hindiscript-likes is the collection name.
The document looks like below
Here's my request body
{
"writes": [
{
"transform": {
"document": "projects/public-api-07/databases/(default)/documents/kof97lbQ1IuuvgCHBfOh",
"fieldTransforms": [
{
"increment": {
"integerValue": 1
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
But upon executing this, it is returnng 400 with the following error
{
"error": {
"code": 400,
"message": "Document name \"projects/public-api-07/databases/(default)/documents/kof97lbQ1IuuvgCHBfOh\" lacks \"/\" at index 73.",
"status": "INVALID_ARGUMENT"
}
}
Can somebody help ?
You're missing the name of the collection in the path of the document to update. What you have now is asking for just "kof97lbQ1IuuvgCHBfOh", which it assumes is the name of a collection but a missing document ID. But what you want instead is "hindiscript-likes/kof97lbQ1IuuvgCHBfOh".
Try:
"document": "projects/public-api-07/databases/(default)/documents/hindiscript-likes/kof97lbQ1IuuvgCHBfOh",
thank you for the time you will take to resolve my issue !
I am not sure that Google app script allows to do what I need.
Could you please tell me if it is possible?
If yes, do you have already a script code to do it?
I have created a file which I have shared it with others colleagues (in a shared drive), and it is used as a "template".
When a colleague creates a copy of it, I would like that the script to give me the new Google sheet id created from the model and saved this id in my Google sheet dashboard?
Is it possible with appscript?
Thanks a lot and have a good day !
Copy Spreadsheet and Save Id
function copySpreadsheetAndSaveId() {
const fileId = "fileid";
const ss = SpreadsheetApp.getActive():
const sh = ss.getSheetByName("Dashboard");
sh.getRange(sh.getLastRow() + 1, 1).setValue(DriveApp.getFileById(fileId).makeCopy().getId());//appends the id to the bottom of column one in the sheeet named Dashboard.
}
If you want users to be able to open the Spreadsheet then you can't restrict them copying it by script only
I can think of a couple of workarounds:
Workaround 1:
Make the Spreadsheet private, and create a web app which runs as you but is accessible by other users. On doGet(), create a copy of the Spreadsheet and share it with the email returned from Session.getActiveUser().getEmail():
function doGet() {
// Check if security policy gets email address:
const user = Session.getActiveUser()
if (!user.getEmail()) {
return ContentService.createTextOutput('Unable to retrieve user.')
}
const ss = DriveApp.getFileById("template-spreadsheet-id")
const newFile = ss.makeCopy().addEditor(user)
const html = `File copied, click here to open.`
return HtmlService.createHtmlOutput(html)
}
Pros:
Should work for anyone within the same domain as you
You can directly retrieve the ID on copy and save it to your database
Cons:
Security policy might stop you being able to get the user
What's to stop them from just copying the copy?
Workaround 2:
If you're an admin user, you could use the Drive Audit Activity API to check for domain-wide copy events of a given file ID. It's a bit more involved and assumes you have a client set up in GCP but will have a bigger catch-radius than the first workaround, and also doesn't involve restricting access to the template or creating a Web App:
function getAuditLog() {
const baseUrl = "https://admin.googleapis.com/admin/reports/v1/activity/users/all/applications/drive"
const apiKey = "api-key-obtained-from-gcp"
const params + `eventName=copy&key=${apiKey}`
const headers = {
"Authorization": `Bearer ${ScriptApp.getOAuthToken()}`,
"Accept": "application/json"
}
const response = UrlFetchApp.fetch(`${baseUrl}?${params}`, {
"method": "get",
"headers": headers"
})
const responseData = JSON.parse(response.getContentText())
}
You'll then have to process the response. responseData contains an items key which is an array of copy events in the audit report:
{
"kind": "admin#reports#activities",
"etag": "\"xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx\"",
"items": [
{
"kind": "admin#reports#activity",
"id": {
"time": "2022-01-21T10:03:12.793Z",
"uniqueQualifier": "-XXXXXXXXXXXXXX",
"applicationName": "drive",
"customerId": "xxxxxxx"
},
"etag": "\"xxxxxxxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxxx\"",
"actor": {
"email": "user#example.com",
"profileId": "XXXXXXXXXXXX"
},
"ipAddress": "0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000",
"events": [
{
"type": "access",
"name": "copy",
"parameters": [
{
"name": "primary_event",
"boolValue": false
},
{
"name": "billable",
"boolValue": true
},
{
"name": "old_value",
"multiValue": [
"Spreadsheet Template File Name"
]
},
{
"name": "new_value",
"multiValue": [
"Copy of Spreadsheet Template File Name"
]
},
{
"name": "doc_id",
"value": "new-spreadsheet-id"
},
{
"name": "doc_type",
"value": "spreadsheet"
},
{
"name": "is_encrypted",
"boolValue": false
},
{
"name": "doc_title",
"value": "Copy of Spreadsheet Template File Name"
},
{
"name": "visibility",
"value": "private"
},
{
"name": "actor_is_collaborator_account",
"boolValue": false
},
{
"name": "owner",
"value": "user#example.com"
},
{
"name": "owner_is_shared_drive",
"boolValue": false
},
{
"name": "owner_is_team_drive",
"boolValue": false
}
]
}
]
}
]
...
}
You will have to filter out the reponse from here, however. For each element in the items array, the events key contains the information you will need to look for:
old_value is the original template spreadsheet's name
doc_id is the ID of the new spreadsheet
items.actor is the email of the person that completed the action.
References:
Example Audit request using the Try this API feature
I'm usig searchkit as part of a website, but have problems in accessing my data that's been converted into json format previously.
My json directory looks like this:
(...)
hits:
0:
_index: content
_type: content
_source:
meta:
author: content
(...)
json
and I'm using RefinementListFilter (in ReactDOM.render) and this works fine:
<RefinementListFilter id="index" title="Index" field={"_index"}/>
<RefinementListFilter id="Type" title="Type" field={"_type"}/>
whereas i can't seem to access the content that is written under author:
<RefinementListFilter id="Author" title="Author" field={"_source.meta.author"}/>
this doesn't work (no error, nothing happens when I type this), although when i use _source.meta.author in this context it works like expected:
class SearchHit extends React.Component {
render() {
const result = this.props.result;
return (
<div className={this.props.bemBlocks.item("author")}> <b> Index: </b> {result._index} </div>
<div className={this.props.bemBlocks.item("author")}> <b> Author: </b> {result._source.meta.author} </div>
)}}
What am I doing wrong? The first and last snippet work just fine, it's just the middle one that doesn't.
The problem is within the field indices of your elasticsearch instance.
According to the docs, Searchkit needs two different kinds of indexed fields for searching and filtering.
In your case it seems like the field author is not indexed correctly.
To solve this, you need to change the elasticsearch mapping for the field author:
...
"meta": {
"properties": {
"author": {
"type": "text",
"fields": {
"raw": {
"type": "keyword"
}
}
...
You can then access the authors in the Refinementfilter via
<RefinementListFilter id="author" title="Author" field={"meta.author.raw"}/>
Try to restructure your JSON file for distinct clarification. You need two different fields for searching and filtering.
"meta": {
"properties": {
"author": {
"type": "text",
"fields": {
"val": {
"type": "keyword"
}
}
While in a Refinementfilter, it can be accessed this way
<RefinementListFilter id="Author" title="Author" field={"meta.author.val"}/>
I've got a rather specific case: Using mongoose/mongo and user objects
I want to find and update user in one call.
DB.collection('users').findOneAndUpdate({localId: id} ,{ "$set": { "name": "lla", "usnme": "As"} } ,callback);
Note that 'username' is spelled wrong. Yet mongo updated the first field(name) and does not give any error about the second.
How can I validate the keys I pass in $set without making more than one query?
What MongoDB suggests here is called schema validation:
In your specific case you could run the following command to make sure that no additional ("incorrect") fields can be added by anyone:
db.runCommand({ "collMod": "users", "validator": {
$jsonSchema: {
additionalProperties: false,
properties: {
"_id": {
bsonType: "objectId"
},
"name": {
bsonType: "string"
},
"username": {
bsonType: "string"
}
}
}
}})
Beyond that I cannot really think of any solution since MongoDB is a document database which by default is schemaless and hence won't stop you from creating the fields you tell it to create...
I'm using backbone and handlebars for templating and i'm new to this.
My current json is in the below format and the code works fine.
[
{
"id": "10",
"info": {
"name": "data10"
}
},
{
"id": "11",
"info": {
"name": "data11"
}
}
]
But when i change my json structure to something like shown below i'm having difficulty in getting things to be populated.
{
"total_count": "10",
"dataElements": [
{
"id": "10",
"info": {
"name": "data10"
}
},
{
"id": "11",
"info": {
"name": "data11"
}
}
]
}
How can i populate name, info and total_count keeping the current code structure ?
JSFiddle : http://jsfiddle.net/KTj2K/1/
Any help really appriciated.
A few things that you need to do in order for this to work.
Replace Backbone's core 'reset' on your collection with a custom one that understands the data you are passing to it. For example:
reset: function (data) {
this.totalCount = data.total_count;
Backbone.Collection.prototype.reset.call(this, data.dataElements);
}
Now when you reset your collection, it will pull the total_count out of the object you are resetting it with, and use Backbone's core reset with the dataElement array. Keep in mind you may have to do a similar thing with 'parse' if you're intending on pulling this from the server.
I'd recommend that (if your example looks anything like the real code you're working with) you reset your collection before getting to rendering.
var dataCollectionList = new dataCollection();
dataCollectionList.reset(jsonData);
var App = new AppView({model : dataCollectionList});
Now in your view's "render" method you can grab the 'totalCount' property off the collection -
render : function() {
//Should spit the total count into the element, just as an example
this.$el.append(this.model.totalCount);
//or console.log it
console.log(this.model.totalCount);
return this;
}
Voila. Side note - as someone who works with Backbone a lot, it drives me nuts when people set an attribute of something like "model" (i.e. peopleModel, itemModel, etc) and it ends up being a backbone collection. It's much clearer to name it after what it is - though some MVC purists may disagree a bit.
Also, in this code block:
_.each(this.model.models, function (myData) {
$(this.el).append(new ItemView({model:myData}).render().el);
}, this);
You don't need to do _.each(this.model.models.......). Since you're working with a collection, the collection has a built in 'each' method.
this.model.each(function (myData) { ..... } , this);
Quite a bit cleaner.