I have 'Users' collection which has two columns, '_id' and 'userName', both of type string.
I want to add third column 'UserId' which will be UUID wrapping the id from _id column.
Tried few ways but without any success.
For example:
{
_id: "fe83f869-154e-4c26-a5db-fb147728820f",
userName: "alex"
}
I want it to be:
{
_id: "fe83f869-154e-4c26-a5db-fb147728820f",
userName: "alex",
UserId: UUID("fe83f869-154e-4c26-a5db-fb147728820f")
}
I tried something like:
db.Users_temp.update(
{},
{ $set: {"UserId": UUID("$_id") } },
false,
true
)
But it results in columns with value UUID("----")
Will appreciate any help.
Ok,
Found a solution to my problem.
db.Users_temp.find().forEach(function(user) {
db.Users_temp.update(
{"_id" : user._id},
{ "$set": {"UserId": UUID(user._id)} }
)
})
this will work
i am not sure why but this works only with set operation as an array rather than as a object
db.Users_temp.update({},[{$set: {'UserId': '$_id'}}])
Related
This has been extensively covered here, but none of the solutions seems to be working for me. I'm attempting to remove an object from an array using that object's id. Currently, my Schema is:
const scheduleSchema = new Schema({
//unrelated
_id: ObjectId
shifts: [
{
_id: Types.ObjectId,
name: String,
shift_start: Date,
shift_end: Date,
},
],
});
I've tried almost every variation of something like this:
.findOneAndUpdate(
{ _id: req.params.id },
{
$pull: {
shifts: { _id: new Types.ObjectId(req.params.id) },
},
}
);
Database:
Database Format
Within these variations, the usual response I've gotten has been either an empty array or null.
I was able slightly find a way around this and accomplish the deletion by utilizing the main _id of the Schema (instead of the nested one:
.findOneAndUpdate(
{ _id: <main _id> },
{ $pull: { shifts: { _id: new Types.ObjectId(<nested _id>) } } },
{ new: true }
);
But I was hoping to figure out a way to do this by just using the nested _id. Any suggestions?
The problem you are having currently is you are using the same _id.
Using mongo, update method allows three objects: query, update and options.
query object is the object into collection which will be updated.
update is the action to do into the object (add, change value...).
options different options to add.
Then, assuming you have this collection:
[
{
"_id": 1,
"shifts": [
{
"_id": 2
},
{
"_id": 3
}
]
}
]
If you try to look for a document which _id is 2, obviously response will be empty (example).
Then, if none document has been found, none document will be updated.
What happens if we look for a document using shifts._id:2?
This tells mongo "search a document where shifts field has an object with _id equals to 2". This query works ok (example) but be careful, this returns the WHOLE document, not only the array which match the _id.
This not return:
[
{
"_id": 1,
"shifts": [
{
"_id": 2
}
]
}
]
Using this query mongo returns the ENTIRE document where exists a field called shifts that contains an object with an _id with value 2. This also include the whole array.
So, with tat, you know why find object works. Now adding this to an update query you can create the query:
This one to remove all shifts._id which are equal to 2.
db.collection.update({
"shifts._id": 2
},
{
$pull: {
shifts: {
_id: 2
}
}
})
Example
Or this one to remove shifts._id if parent _id is equal to 1
db.collection.update({
"_id": 1
},
{
$pull: {
shifts: {
_id: 2
}
}
})
Example
Below is my collection
[{documentId: 123, id: uniqueValue }]
Expected result
[{documentId: 123, id: id1,uniqueKey: uniqueValue }]
How do I refer "id" column for currently updating records, also id column can be anything for which my outer query is giving me the column name
db.supplier.updateMany( { documentId : 123}, { $set: { "uniqueKey": id} } );
so in above query "id" is coming like outerObject.mapping.idColumn which I want to substitute in above query.
The whole point of doing this, is to create index on column, and current collection does not have fixed column name on which I want to fire a query
Example
There are two collections collectionOne and collectionTwo
for each document in collectionOne there are multiple document in collectionTwo. The docId is used for lookup.
collectionOne
[{
docId :123,
col1 : lookupColumn
metaData: "some metaData",
extra : "extra columns"
}, ... ]
collectionTwo
[{
docId :123,
lookupColumn:"1",
a:"A",
b:"B" ....
},
{ docId :123,
lookupColumn:"2",
a:"A",
b:"B" ....
}
{ docId :123,
lookupColumn:"3",
a:"A",
b:"B" ....},.....]
lookupColumn in collectionTwo may have different name and mapping of that name is given in collectionOne by col1 field (which is always same), in this example col1 value is lookupColumn so I want to create a column newKey and copy value of lookupColumn into it.
So I came up with below Query
db.collectionOne.find({}).forEach(function(obj) {
if(obj.columns) {
existingColumn =obj.columns.col1;
db.collectionTwo.updateMany( { docId: obj.docId}, { $set: { "newKey": existingColumn} } );
}
}
problem is I am not able to pick an existing column name using variable existingColumn, I have tried using $ as well, which inserts $"existingColumn" as newKey value.
I have updated query with one more loop over collectionTwo but I feel that in optimized and unnecessary.
To go from
{documentId: 123, id: uniqueValue }
to
{documentId: 123, id: id1, uniqueKey: uniqueValue }
Use the pipeline style of update, which lets you use aggregation syntax:
db.collection.update({documentId: 123}, [{$set:{uniqueKey:"$id", id:"id1"}}])
EDIT
The latest edit to the question makes this a lot more clear.
You were almost there.
In MongoDB 4.2, the second argument to updateMany accepts either an update document like you were using:
db.collectionTwo.updateMany( { docId: obj.docId}, { $set: { "newKey": existingColumn} } );
Or it can accept an aggregation-like pipeline, but not all stages are available. For this use, if you make that second argument an array so that it is recognized as a pipeline, you can use the "$variable" structure. Since you already have the field name in a javascript variable, prepend "$" to the fieldname:
db.collectionTwo.updateMany( { docId: obj.docId}, [{ $set: { "newKey": "$" + existingColumn} }] );
This error happens when I tried to update upsert item:
Updating the path 'x' would create a conflict at 'x'
Field should appear either in $set, or in $setOnInsert. Not in both.
I had the same problem while performing an update query using PyMongo.
I was trying to do:
> db.people.update( {'name':'lmn'}, { $inc : { 'key1' : 2 }, $set: { 'key1' : 5 }})
Notice that here I'm trying to update the value of key1 from two MongoDB Update Operators.
This basically happens when you try to update the value of a same key with more than one MongoDB Update Operators within the same query.
You can find a list of Update Operators over here
If you pass the same key in $set and in $unset when updating an item, you will get that error.
For example:
const body = {
_id: '47b82d36f33ad21b90'
name: 'John',
lastName: 'Smith'
}
MyModel.findByIdAndUpdate(body._id, { $set: body, $unset: {name: 1}})
// Updating the path 'name' would create a conflict at 'name'
You cannot have the same path referenced more than once in an update. For example, even though the below would result in something logical, MongoDB will not allow it.
db.getCollection("user").updateOne(
{_id: ...},
{$set: {'address': {state: 'CA'}, 'address.city' : 'San Diego'}}
)
You would get the following error:
Updating the path 'address.city' would create a conflict at 'address'
db.products.update(
{ _id: 1 },
{
$set: { item: "apple" },
$setOnInsert: { defaultQty: 100 }
},
{ upsert: true }
)
Below is the key explanation to the issue:
MongoDB creates a new document with _id equal to 1 from the
condition, and then applies the $set AND $setOnInsert operations to
this document.
If you want a field value is set or updated regardless of insertion or update, use it in $set. If you want it to be set only on insertion, use it in $setOnInsert.
Here is the example: https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/reference/operator/update/setOnInsert/#example
Starting from MongoDB 4.2 you can use aggregate pipelines in update:
db.your_collection.update({
_id: 1
},
[{
$set:{
x_field: {
$cond: {
if: {$eq:[{$type:"$_id"} , "missing"]},
then: 'upsert value', // it's the upsert case
else: '$x_field' // it's the update case
}
}
}
}],
{
upsert: true
})
db.collection.bulkWrite() also supports it
With the Ruby library at least, it's possible to get this error if you have the same key twice, once as a symbol and once as a string:
db.getCollection("user").updateOne(
{_id: ...},
{$set: {'name': "Horse", name: "Horse"}}
)
I recently had the same issue while using the query below.
TextContainer.findOneAndUpdate({ blockId: req.params.blockId, 'content._id': req.params.noteId }, { $set: { 'content.note': req.body.note } }, { upsert: true, new: true })
When i have changed 'content.note' to 'content.$.note' it has been fixed. So my final query is :
TextContainer.findOneAndUpdate({ blockId: req.params.blockId, 'content._id': req.params.noteId }, { $set: { 'content.$.note': req.body.note } }, { upsert: true, new: true })
Is there a way to update values in an object?
{
_id: 1,
name: 'John Smith',
items: [{
id: 1,
name: 'item 1',
value: 'one'
},{
id: 2,
name: 'item 2',
value: 'two'
}]
}
Lets say I want to update the name and value items for item where id = 2;
I have tried the following w/ mongoose:
var update = {name: 'updated item2', value: 'two updated'};
Person.update({'items.id': 2}, {'$set': {'items.$': update}}, function(err) { ...
Problem with this approach is that it updates/sets the entire object, therefore in this case I lose the id field.
Is there a better way in mongoose to set certain values in an array but leave other values alone?
I have also queried for just the Person:
Person.find({...}, function(err, person) {
person.items ..... // I might be able to search through all the items here and find item with id 2 then update the values I want and call person.save().
});
You're close; you should use dot notation in your use of the $ update operator to do that:
Person.update({'items.id': 2}, {'$set': {
'items.$.name': 'updated item2',
'items.$.value': 'two updated'
}}, function(err) { ...
model.update(
{ _id: 1, "items.id": "2" },
{
$set: {
"items.$.name": "yourValue",
"items.$.value": "yourvalue",
}
}
)
MongoDB Document
There is a mongoose way for doing it.
const itemId = 2;
const query = {
item._id: itemId
};
Person.findOne(query).then(doc => {
item = doc.items.id(itemId );
item["name"] = "new name";
item["value"] = "new value";
doc.save();
//sent respnse to client
}).catch(err => {
console.log('Oh! Dark')
});
There is one thing to remember, when you are searching the object in array on the basis of more than one condition then use $elemMatch
Person.update(
{
_id: 5,
grades: { $elemMatch: { grade: { $lte: 90 }, mean: { $gt: 80 } } }
},
{ $set: { "grades.$.std" : 6 } }
)
here is the docs
For each document, the update operator $set can set multiple values, so rather than replacing the entire object in the items array, you can set the name and value fields of the object individually.
{'$set': {'items.$.name': update.name , 'items.$.value': update.value}}
Below is an example of how to update the value in the array of objects more dynamically.
Person.findOneAndUpdate({_id: id},
{
"$set": {[`items.$[outer].${propertyName}`]: value}
},
{
"arrayFilters": [{ "outer.id": itemId }]
},
function(err, response) {
...
})
Note that by doing it that way, you would be able to update even deeper levels of the nested array by adding additional arrayFilters and positional operator like so:
"$set": {[`items.$[outer].innerItems.$[inner].${propertyName}`]: value}
"arrayFilters":[{ "outer.id": itemId },{ "inner.id": innerItemId }]
More usage can be found in the official docs.
cleaner solution using findOneAndUpdate
await Person.findOneAndUpdate(
{ _id: id, 'items.id': 2 },
{
$set: {
'items.$.name': 'updated item2',
'items.$.value': 'two updated',
}
},
);
In Mongoose, we can update array value using $set inside dot(.) notation to specific value in following way
db.collection.update({"_id": args._id, "viewData._id": widgetId}, {$set: {"viewData.$.widgetData": widgetDoc.widgetData}})
Having tried other solutions which worked fine, but the pitfall of their answers is that only fields already existing would update adding upsert to it would do nothing, so I came up with this.
Person.update({'items.id': 2}, {$set: {
'items': { "item1", "item2", "item3", "item4" } }, {upsert:
true })
I had similar issues. Here is the cleanest way to do it.
const personQuery = {
_id: 1
}
const itemID = 2;
Person.findOne(personQuery).then(item => {
const audioIndex = item.items.map(item => item.id).indexOf(itemID);
item.items[audioIndex].name = 'Name value';
item.save();
});
Found this solution using dot-object and it helped me.
import dot from "dot-object";
const user = await User.findByIdAndUpdate(id, { ...dot.dot(req.body) });
I needed to update an array element with dynamic key-value pairs.
By mapping the update object to new keys containing the $ update operator, I am no longer bound to know the updated keys of the array element and instead assemble a new update object on the fly.
update = {
name: "Andy",
newKey: "new value"
}
new_update = Object.fromEntries(
Object.entries(update).map(
([k, v], i) => ["my_array.$." + k, v]
)
)
console.log({
"$set": new_update
})
In mongoose we can update, like simple array
user.updateInfoByIndex(0,"test")
User.methods.updateInfoByIndex = function(index, info) ={
this.arrayField[index]=info
this.save()
}
update(
{_id: 1, 'items.id': 2},
{'$set': {'items.$[]': update}},
{new: true})
Here is the doc about $[]: https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/reference/operator/update/positional-all/#up.S[]
I've got a little problem with mongodb update method. This is my (simplified) schemas:
{
profile: {
birthdate: "XXX",
city: "xxx"
},
account: {
username: "...",
password: "....",
visits: 0
}
}
I've got 2000 objects in DB. I want to anonymize datas by removing username values.
I tried this:
db.users.update({}, {$set: account: {username: ""}}, false, true);
That doesn't works, this query remove password field and visits. I understand why, but how to do ?
db.users.update({}, {account: { $set: {username: ""}}}, false, true);
mongo want to assign "$set" field, so that dosen't work.
My question is: how to update descendant fields without removing the entire "account" subdocument ?
(Setting "upsert" to true does the same.)
You should use:
$set:{"account.username":""}
Just wondering why you don't use $unset?