In the MEAN app I'm currently building, the client-side makes a $http POST request to my API with a JSON array of soundcloud track data specific to that user. What I now want to achieve is for those tracks to be saved to my app database under a 'tracks' table. That way I'm then able to load tracks for that user from the database and also have the ability to create unique client URLs (/tracks/:track)
Some example data:
{
artist: "Nicole Moudaber"
artwork: "https://i1.sndcdn.com/artworks-000087731284-gevxfm-large.jpg?e76cf77"
source: "soundcloud"
stream: "https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/162626499/stream.mp3?client_id=7d7e31b7e9ae5dc73586fcd143574550"
title: "In The MOOD - Episode 14"
}
This data is then passed to the API like so:
app.post('/tracks/add/new', function (req, res) {
var newTrack;
for (var i = 0; i < req.body.length; i++) {
newTrack = new tracksTable({
for_user: req.user._id,
title: req.body[i].title,
artist: req.body[i].artist,
artwork: req.body[i].artwork,
source: req.body[i].source,
stream: req.body[i].stream
});
tracksTable.find({'for_user': req.user._id, stream: req.body[i].stream}, function (err, trackTableData) {
if (err)
console.log('MongoDB Error: ' + err);
// stuck here - read below
});
}
});
The point at which I'm stuck, as marked above is this: I need to check if that track already exists in the database for that user, if it doesn't then save it. Then, once the loop has finished and all tracks have either been saved or ignored, a 200 response needs to be sent back to my client.
I've tried several methods so far and nothing seems to work, I've really hit a wall and so help/advice on this would be greatly appreciated.
Create a compound index and make it unique.
Using the index mentioned above will ensure that there are no documents which have the same for_user and stream.
trackSchema.ensureIndex( {for_user:1, stream:1}, {unique, true} )
Now use the mongoDB batch operation to insert multiple documents.
//docs is the array of tracks you are going to insert.
trackTable.collection.insert(docs, options, function(err,savedDocs){
//savedDocs is the array of docs saved.
//By checking savedDocs you can see how many tracks were actually inserted
})
Make sure to validate your objects as by using .collection we are bypassing mongoose.
Make a unique _id based on user and track. In mongo you can pass in the _id that you want to use.
Example {_id : "NicoleMoudaber InTheMOODEpisode14",
artist: "Nicole Moudaber"
artwork: "https://i1.sndcdn.com/artworks-000087731284-gevxfm-large.jpg?e76cf77"
source: "soundcloud"
stream: "https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/162626499/stream.mp3? client_id=7d7e31b7e9ae5dc73586fcd143574550"
title: "In The MOOD - Episode 14"}
_id must be unique and won't let you insert another document with the same _id. You could also use this to find the record later db.collection.find({_id : NicoleMoudaber InTheMOODEpisode14})
or you could find all tracks for db.collection.find({_id : /^NicoleMoudaber/}) and it will still use the index.
There is another method to this that I can explain if you dont' like this one.
Both options will work in a sharded environment as well as a single replica set. "Unique" indexes do not work in a sharded environment.
Soundcloud API provides a track id, just use it.
then before inserting datas you make a
tracks.find({id_soundcloud : 25645456}).exec(function(err,track){
if(track.length){ console.log("do nothing")}else {//insert}
});
Related
our current setup is: SPA frontend, Azure functions with mongoose middleware, MongoDB
(Maybe first read the question***)
Since we have a lot of documents in our DB and our customer wants to query them we are facing the following problem:
The user is assigned to his organization. He wants to search for Doc1s he has not responded to.
Doc1
{
_id
organization -> partitionKey
content
}
By creating doc2 with reference to doc1 he can respond.
Doc2
{
_id
organization -> partitionKey
Doc1ref
content
}
We have a 1:n relationship.
At the moment we filter just by query criteria of doc1 with limit and skip options.
But the new requirement is to filter the same way by referring doc2s.
I was thinking of:
Doing it in my code => Problem: after we have read with limit=100 and I filter it by my code, the result is not 100 anymore.
Extending doc1 by doc2 arrays => Must be the last option
Dynamic aggregation, Prepared in the code and executed at runtime => Don't want to user dynamic aggregations and the benefits of mongoose are almost lost.
Create a MongoDB view with lookup aggregation (populating doc1 by doc1.respondedOrganizations) => Problem is see here is the performance. When searching a lot of documents and then joining them by a non partitionKey.
*** So, I come to my question:
Is it possible to pass a virtual (not existing) query criteria...
doc1.find({ alreadyResponded : my.organization } )
...and use it as input variable in an aggregation
{
$lookup: {
from: Doc2s,
localField: _id,
foreignField: Doc1ref,
as: < output array field >
pipeline: [{
$match: {
$organization: {
$eq: $$alreadyResponded
}]
}
}
It would reduce query performance extremly.
Thanks
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 $elemMatch and dot notation, set upsert and multi, with no results. I've used an identical command on mongo shell and it has work on the first try.
Update with Mongo Shell
If someone could tell me what I'm doing wrong or point me in the right direction, it would be great.
Thanks
When you use a MongoId as a field in a MongoDB, you can't just pass a string with the id to do the query, you have to identify that string as an ObjectId (Id type in Mongo). Just add a new require in your node.js file.
var ObjectID = require("mongodb").ObjectID;
And use the imported constructor in your update request.
dbM.collection("results").update(
{user:ObjectID(id),...
...
}
I have a collection in my mongo database by the name "user collection". The collection holds entries with one attribute by the name "DBinstaID".
{ "_id" : ObjectId("5595f6be3eaf90ae2d759cc6"), "DBinstaID" : "280430135" }
I am trying to determine whether a new entry has the same DBinstaID value, and if so increase the count of "idCount". The following code is used in my index.js routing file for node.js/express.
var collection = db.get('usercollection');
var checkDuplicate = collection.find({$where: function(){this.DBinstaID === instaID}});
console.log("DUPLICATE STATUS: " + checkDuplicate);
if(!(checkDuplicate)){
idCount++;
}
However, the checkDuplicate variable is simply set to [object Object] instead of the boolean true or false. How can I search the collection and return a boolean?
Thank you in advance for the help.
The collection.find() method is asynchronous, this means you can't get the results right away, and you need to handle anything dependant on these results directly in the callback.
I strongly advise you to have a good read of mongoosejs's docs (at least the code examples), and to take a look at basics of asynchronous programming in node.js (a google search away).
You can use collection.findOne() to get only one result :
var collection = db.get('usercollection');
collection.findOne({DBinstaID: instaID}, function(err, user) {
// don't forget to check for errors here, masked for clarity
console.log("DUPLICATE STATUS: ", user);
if(user) {
idCount++;
}
// rest of the code
});
I am working to solve a problem not dissimilar to the discussion present at the following blog post. This is wishing to publish two related data sets in Meteor, with a 'reactive join' on the server side.
https://www.discovermeteor.com/blog/reactive-joins-in-meteor/
Unfortunately for me, however, the related collection I wish to join to, will not be joined using the "_id" field, but using another field. Normally in mongo and meteor I would create a 'filter' block where I could specify this query. However, as far as I can tell in the PWR package, there is an implicit assumption to join on '_id'.
If you review the example given on the 'publish-with-relations' github page (see below) you can see that both posts and comments are being joined to the Meteor.users '_id' field. But what if we needed to join to the Meteor.users 'address' field ?
https://github.com/svasva/meteor-publish-with-relations
In the short term I have specified my query 'upside down' (as luckily I m able to use the _id field when doing a reverse join), but I suspect this will result in an inefficient query as the datasets grow, so would rather be able to do a join in the direction planned.
The two collections we are joining can be thought of as like a conversation topic/header record, and a conversation message collection (i.e. one entry in the collection for each message in the conversation).
The conversation topic in my solution is using the _id field to join, the conversation messages have a "conversationKey" field to join with.
The following call works, but this is querying from the messages to the conversation, instead of vice versa, which would be more natural.
Meteor.publishWithRelations({
handle: this,
collection: conversationMessages,
filter: { "conversationKey" : requestedKey },
options : {sort: {msgTime: -1}},
mappings: [{
//reverse: true,
key: 'conversationKey',
collection: conversationTopics,
filter: { startTime: { $gt : (new Date().getTime() - aLongTimeAgo ) } },
options: {
sort: { createdAt: -1 }
},
}]
});
Can you do a join without an _id?
No, not with PWR. Joining with a foreign key which is the id in another table/collection is nearly always how relational data is queried. PWR is making that assumption to reduce the complexity of an already tricky implementation.
How can this publish be improved?
You don't actually need a reactive join here because one query does not depend on the result of another. It would if each conversation topic held an array of conversation message ids. Because both collections can be queried independently, you can return an array of cursors instead:
Meteor.publish('conversations', function(requestedKey) {
check(requestedKey, String);
var aLongTimeAgo = 864000000;
var filter = {startTime: {$gt: new Date().getTime() - aLongTimeAgo}};
return [
conversationMessages.find({conversationKey: requestedKey}),
conversationTopics.find(requestedKey, {filter: filter})
];
});
Notes
Sorting in your publish function isn't useful unless you are using a limit.
Be sure to use a forked version of PWR like this one which includes Tom's memory leak fix.
Instead of conversationKey I would call it conversationTopicId to be more clear.
I think this could be now much easier solved with the reactive-publish package (I am one of authors). You can make any query now inside an autorun and then use the results of that to publish the query you want to push to the client. I would write you an example code, but I do not really understand what exactly do you need. For example, you mention you would like to limit topics, but you do not explain why would they be limited if you are providing requestedKey which is an ID of a document anyway? So only one result is available?
I have a blogs collection that contains title, body and agrregate rating that the users have given to them. Another collection 'Ratings' whose schema has reference to the blog, user who rated(if at all he rates them) it in the form of their ObjectIds and the rating they have given ie., +1 or -1.
When a particular user browses through blogs in the 'latest first' order (say 40 of them per page. Call them an array of blogs[0] to blogs[39]) I have to retrieve the rating documents related to this particular user and those 40 blogs if at all the user rated them and notify him of what ratings he has given those blogs.
I tried to extract all rating documents of a particular user in which blog reference objectIds lie between blogs[0]._id and blogs[39]._id which returns empty list in my case. May be objectIds cant be compared using $lt and $gt queries. In that case how should I go about it? Should I redesign my schemas to fit to this scenario?
I am using mongoosejs driver for this case. Here are the relevant parts of the code which differ a bit in execution but youu get the idea.
Schemas:
Client= new mongoose.Schema({
ip:String
})
Rates = new mongoose.Schema({
client:ObjectId,
newsid:ObjectId,
rate:Number
})
News = new mongoose.Schema({
title: String,
body: String,
likes:{type:Number,default:0},
dislikes:{type:Number,default:0},
created:Date,
// tag:String,
client:ObjectId,
tag:String,
ff:{type:Number,default:20}
});
models:
var newsm=mongoose.model('News', News);
var clientm=mongoose.model('Client', Client);
var ratesm=mongoose.model('Rates', Rates);
Logic:
newsm.find({tag:tag[req.params.tag_id]},[],{ sort:{created:-1},limit: buffer+1 },function(err,news){
ratesm.find({client:client._id,newsid:{$lte:news[0]._id,$gte:news.slice(-1)[0]._id}},function(err,ratings){
})
})
Edit:
While implementing the below said schema, I had to do this query in mongoose.js
> db.blogposts.findOne()
{ title : "My First Post", author: "Jane",
comments : [{ by: "Abe", text: "First" },
{ by : "Ada", text : "Good post" } ]
}
> db.blogposts.find( { "comments.by" : "Ada" } )
How do I do this query in mongoose?
A good practice with MongoDB (and other non-relational data stores) is to model your data so it is easy to use/query in your application. In your case, you might consider denormalizing the structure a bit and store the rating right in the blog collection, so a blog might look something like this:
{
title: "My New Post",
body: "Here's my new post. It is great. ...",
likes: 20,
dislikes: 5,
...
rates: [
{ client_id: (id of client), rate: 5 },
{ client_id: (id of another client), rate: 3 },
{ client_id: (id of a third client), rate: 10 }
]
}
The idea being that the objects in the rates array contains all the data you'll need to display the blog entry, complete with ratings, right in the single document. If you also need to query the rates in another way (e.g. find all the ratings made by user X), and the site is read-heavy, you may consider also storing the data in a Rates collection as you're doing now. Sure, the data is in two places, and it's harder to update, but it may be an overall win after you analyze your app and how it accesses your data.
Note that you can apply indexes deep into a document's structure, so for example you can index News.rates.client_id, and then you can quickly find any documents in the News collection that a particular user has rated.