I am working on a kotlin reactive spring-boot mongodb project. I'm trying to update a document but it does not work well.
My problem is pretty similar to the following question in stackoverflow.
Spring reactive mongodb template update document partially with objects
So I have a document in mongo
{
"id": 1,
"name": "MYNAME",
"email": "MYEMAIL",
"encryptedPassword": "12345",
...........................
}
And when I call PATCH on the uri localhost:8080/user/1 with the one of following header
{
"name": "NEW NAME"
}
{
"email": "NEW EMAIL"
}
I want to update my document with received fields only.
My handler code
fun update(serverRequest: ServerRequest) =
userService
.updateUser(serverRequest.pathVariable("id").toLong(), serverRequest.bodyToMono())
.flatMap {
ok().build()
}
My Service Implement code
override fun updateUser(id: Long, request: Mono<User>): Mono<UpdateResult> {
val changes = request.map { it -> PropertyUtils.describe(it) }
val updateFields: Update = Update()
changes.subscribe {
for (entry in it.entries) {
updateFields.set(entry.key, entry.value)
}
}
return userRepository.updateById(id, updateFields)
}
My repository code
fun updateById(id: Long, partial: Update) = template.updateFirst(Query(where("id").isEqualTo(id)), partial, User::class.java)
My user code
#Document
data class User(
#Id
val id: Long = 0,
var name: String = "",
val email: String = "",
val encryptedPassword: ""
)
I have followed the advice that Spring reactive mongodb template update document partially with objects gave.
My code do updates, but it updates to the initial constructor of my User class.
Could anyone help with this?
I guess you should consider this problem as a general problem of patching an object in Java/Kotlin. I found an article about this: https://cassiomolin.com/2019/06/10/using-http-patch-in-spring/#json-merge-patch. Even if you won't update partially an object, there should not be such a big impact on performance of your application.
I figured out how to partially update my data.
First I changed the body request to string. (using bodyToMono(String::class.java)
Then I changed the changed JSON string to JSONObject(org.json).
And for each of its JSONObject's key I created Update that will be the partial data to update my entity.
Following is how I implemented this.
override fun updateUser(id: Long, request: Mono<String>): Mono<UpdateResult> {
val update = Update()
return request.map { JSONObject(it) }
.map {
it.keys().forEach { key -> update.set(key, it[key]) }
update
}
.flatMap { it -> userRepository.updateById(id, it) }
}
Please share more idea if you have more 'cleaner' way to do this. Thank you
Related
I am trying to implement updation in a composite-type model in Prisma.
Here is my data structure:
{
"name":"toy",
"data":{
"sports":{
"currentState":"false"
},
"business":{
"currentState":"false"
}
}
}
Here I my code for updating:
const updatedSource = await prisma.sources.update({
where: {
name: 'toy'
},
data: {
data: {
sports: {
currentState: "true"
}
}
},
})
Here is my schema file
type SourcesData {
business SourcesDataState
sports SourcesDataState
}
type SourcesDataState {
currentState StateData[]
}
type StateData {
title String
url String
}
model sources {
id String #id #default(auto()) #map("_id") #db.ObjectId
data SourcesData
name String #unique
}
When I execute the above logic I get error as:Unknown arg `sports` in data.data.sports for type SourcesDataUpdateEnvelopeInput. Did you mean `set`? Available args:
Please guide what I am missing while updating.
The TypeScript should be pretty helpful in telling you what arguments you can or cannot use when interacting with Prisma. I strongly recommend using a code editor that includes TypeScript typehinting/Intellisense so you can see errors and warnings about your TypeScript usage as you are developing with Prisma.
Where it says Available args in your error, that should tell you the arguments that prisma.sports.update actually expects. If I had to guess (this may not be accurate, but you HAVE to look at the TypeScript to know exactly what it's supposed to be), it should look something like this:
const updatedSource = await prisma.sources.update({
where: {
name: 'toy'
},
data: {
data: {
update: {
sports: {
update: {
currentState: {
set: ["true"]
}
}
}
}
}
},
})
I strongly recommend reading Prisma's documentation on updating related/nested records: https://www.prisma.io/docs/concepts/components/prisma-client/relation-queries#update-a-specific-related-record
let typeEncounter = await prisma.encounter.update({
where: {
id
},
data: {
[property]: {
update: {
[subProperty] : value,
},
},
},
}
)
I get a receive the error Unknown arg update in data..update
I have seen some people mention nesting updates but no official documentation and can't seem to get this straightened out. Anybody have any ideas? The property and subproperty are largely irrelevant here, just examples. The code works fine aside from updated a subfield of a type (mongoDB prisma). Without the update the entire type gets overwritten rather than the selected field.
I'm using AWS appsync + DynamoDB.
The problem: I created the new field 'rating' in my 'Users' schema:
type Users {
id: ID!
first: String!
last: String!
rating: String #<----The new field
}
AppSync created all the resources and I can create new records with Mutations and that works like a charm.
mutation createUsers{
createUsers(input:{
first:"John"
last:"Smith"
rating:"B" #<---Writing new field without problem
}){
id
first
last
rating #<---Confirming that is recorded in DynamoDB
}
}
The problem is that I can't figure out how to write the resolver to make the following query work.
query{
queryUsersByRating(rating: "B"){
items{
id
username
rating
}
}
}
The result is this:
{
"data": {
"queryUsersByRating": null
}
}
The problem is clearly identified here under "Missing Resolver", but there's no clear solution.
I tried attaching the following Resolver directly in AppSync interface but is not working:
{
"version" : "2017-02-28",
"operation" : "Query",
"query" : {
"expression": "rating = :rating",
"expressionValues" : {
":rating" : $util.dynamodb.toDynamoDBJson($ctx.args.rating)
}
}
}
Any help would be appreciated, THANKS!
You don't have to write your own resolver for querying by rating, Appsync wrapped all the fields inside filter.
query{
queryUsersByRating(filter: {rating: "B"}){
items{
id
username
rating
}
}
}
I am having difficulties getting multiple datasets out of my database with RestTemplate. I have many routines that extract a single row, with a format like:
IndicatorModel indicatorModel = restTemplate.getForObject(URL + id,
IndicatorModel.class);
and they work fine. However, if I try to extract a set of data, such as:
Map<String, List<S_ServiceCoreTypeModel>> coreTypesMap =
restTemplate.getForObject(URL + id, Map.class);
this returns values in a
Map<String, LinkedHashMap<>>
format. Is there an easy way to return a List<> or Set<> in the desired format?
Fundamentally the issue is that your Java object model does not match the structure of your json document. You are attempting to deserialize a single json element into a java List. Your JSON document looks like:
{
"serviceCoreTypes":[
{
"serviceCoreType":{
"name":"ALL",
"description":"All",
"dateCreated":"2016-06-23 14:46:32.09",
"dateModified":"2016-06-23 14:46:32.09",
"deleted":false,
"id":1
}
},
{
"serviceCoreType":{
"name":"HSI",
"description":"High-speed Internet",
"dateCreated":"2016-06-23 14:47:31.317",
"dateModified":"2016-06-23 14:47:31.317",
"deleted":false,
"id":2
}
}
]
}
But you cannot turn a serviceCoreTypes into a List, you can only turn a Json Array into a List. For instance if you removed the unnecessary wrapper elements from your json and your input document looked like:
[
{
"name": "ALL",
"description": "All",
"dateCreated": "2016-06-23 14:46:32.09",
"dateModified": "2016-06-23 14:46:32.09",
"deleted": false,
"id": 1
},
{
"name": "HSI",
"description": "High-speed Internet",
"dateCreated": "2016-06-23 14:47:31.317",
"dateModified": "2016-06-23 14:47:31.317",
"deleted": false,
"id": 2
}
]
You should be able to then deserialize THAT into a List< S_ServiceCoreTypeModel>. Alternately if you cannot change the json structure, you could create a Java object model that models the json document by creating some wrapper classes. Something like:
class ServiceCoreTypes {
List<ServiceCoreType> serviceCoreTypes;
...
}
class ServiceCoreTypeWrapper {
ServiceCoreType serviceCoreType;
...
}
class ServiceCoreType {
String name;
String description;
...
}
I'm assuming you don't actually mean database, but instead a restful service as you're using RestTemplate
The problem you're facing is that you want to get a Collection back, but the getForObject method can only take in a single type parameter and cannot figure out what the type of the returned collection is.
I'd encourage you to consider using RestTemplate.exchange(...)
which should allow you request for and receive back a collection type.
I have a solution that works, for now at least. I would prefer a solution such as the one proposed by Ben, where I can get the HTTP response body as a list of items in the format I chose, but at least here I can extract each individual item from the JSON node. The code:
S_ServiceCoreTypeModel endModel;
RestTemplate restTemplate = new RestTemplate();
JsonNode node = restTemplate.getForObject(URL, JsonNode.class);
JsonNode allNodes = node.get("serviceCoreTypes");
JsonNode oneNode = allNodes.get(1);
ObjectMapper objectMapper = new ObjectMapper();
endModel = objectMapper.readValue(oneNode.toString(), S_ServiceCoreTypeModel.class);
If anyone has thoughts on how to make Ben's solution work, I would love to hear it.
I am trying to insert nested documents in to a MongoDB using C#. I have a collection called categories. In that collection there must exist documents with 2 array, one named categories and one named standards. Inside those arrays must exist new documents with their own ID's that also contain arrays of the same names listed above. Below is what I have so far but I am unsure how to proceed. If you look at the code what I want to do is add the "namingConventions" document nested under the categories array in the categories document however namingConventions must have a unique ID also.
At this point I am not sure I have done any of this the best way possible so I am open to any and all advice on this entire thing.
namespace ClassLibrary1
{
using MongoDB.Bson;
using MongoDB.Driver;
public class Class1
{
public void test()
{
string connectionString = "mongodb://localhost";
MongoServer server = MongoServer.Create(connectionString);
MongoDatabase standards = server.GetDatabase("Standards");
MongoCollection<BsonDocument> categories = standards.GetCollection<BsonDocument>("catagories");
BsonDocument[] batch = {
new BsonDocument { { "categories", new BsonArray {} },
{ "standards", new BsonArray { } } },
new BsonDocument { { "catagories", new BsonArray { } },
{ "standards", new BsonArray { } } },
};
categories.InsertBatch(batch);
((BsonArray)batch[0]["categories"]).Add(batch[1]);
categories.Save(batch[0]);
}
}
}
For clarity this is what I need:
What I am doing is building a coding standards site. The company wants all the standards stored in MongoDB in a tree. Everything must have a unique ID so that on top of being queried as a tree it can be queried by itself also. An example could be:
/* 0 */
{
"_id" : ObjectId("4fb39795b74861183c713807"),
"catagories" : [],
"standards" : []
}
/* 1 */
{
"_id" : ObjectId("4fb39795b74861183c713806"),
"categories" : [{
"_id" : ObjectId("4fb39795b74861183c713807"),
"catagories" : [],
"standards" : []
}],
"standards" : []
}
Now I have written code to make this happen but the issue seems to be that when I add object "0" to the categories array in object "1" it is not making a reference but instead copying it. This will not due because if changes are made they will be made to the original object "0" so they will not be pushed to the copy being made in the categories array, at least that is what is happening to me. I hope this clears up what I am looking for.
So, based on your latest comment, it seems as though this is the actual structure you are looking for:
{
_id: ObjectId(),
name: "NamingConventions",
categories: [
{
id: ObjectId(),
name: "Namespaces",
standards: [
{
id: ObjectId(),
name: "TitleCased",
description: "Namespaces must be Title Cased."
},
{
id: ObjectId().
name: "NoAbbreviations",
description: "Namespaces must not use abbreviations."
}
]
},
{
id: ObjectId(),
name: "Variables",
standards: [
{
id: ObjectId(),
name: "CamelCased",
description: "variables must be camel cased."
}
]
}
]
}
Assuming this is correct, then the below is how you would insert one of these:
var collection = db.GetCollection("some collection name");
var root = new BsonDocument();
root.Add("name", "NamingConventions");
var rootCategories = new BsonArray();
rootCategories.Add(new BsonDocument
{
{ "id": ObjectId.GenerateNewId() },
{ "name", "Namespaces" },
{ "standards", new BsonArray() }
});
root.Add("categories", rootCategories);
//etc...
collection.Save(root);
Hope that helps, if not, I give up :).
So, I guess I'm confused by what you are asking. If you just want to store the namingConventions documents inside the array, you don't need a collection for them. Instead, just add them to the bson array and store them.
var categoriesCollection = db.GetCollection<BsonDocument>("categories");
var category = new BsonDocument();
var namingConventions = new BsonArray();
namingConventions.Add(new BsonDocument("convention1", "value"));
category.Add("naming_conventions", namingConventions);
categoriesCollection.Insert(category);
This will create a new document for a category, create an array in it called naming_conventions with a single document in it with an element called "convention1" and a value of "value".
I also am not quite sure what you are trying to accomplish. Perhaps if you posted some sample documents in JSON format we could show you the C# code to write documents that match that.
Alternatively, if you wish to discuss your schema, that could also be better done in the context of JSON rather than C#, and once a schema has been settled on then we can discuss how to write documents to that schema in C#.
One thing that didn't sound right in your original description was the statement "in that collection must exist 2 arrays". A collection can only contain documents, not arrays. The documents themselves can contain arrays if you want.
var filter = Builders<CollectionDefination>.Filter.Where(r => r._id== id);
var data = Builders<CollectionDefination>.Update.Push(f=>
f.categories,categoriesObject);
await _dbService.collection.UpdateOneAsync( filter,data);
Note: Make sure embedded document type [Categories] is array.
I am making a analytics system, the API call would provide a Unique User ID, but it's not in sequence and too sparse.
I need to give each Unique User ID an auto increment id to mark a analytics datapoint in a bitarray/bitset. So the first user encounters would corresponding to the first bit of the bitarray, second user would be the second bit in the bitarray, etc.
So is there a solid and fast way to generate incremental Unique User IDs in MongoDB?
As selected answer says you can use findAndModify to generate sequential IDs.
But I strongly disagree with opinion that you should not do that. It all depends on your business needs. Having 12-byte ID may be very resource consuming and cause significant scalability issues in future.
I have detailed answer here.
You can, but you should not
https://web.archive.org/web/20151009224806/http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/tutorial/create-an-auto-incrementing-field/
Each object in mongo already has an id, and they are sortable in insertion order. What is wrong with getting collection of user objects, iterating over it and use this as incremented ID? Er go for kind of map-reduce job entirely
I know this is an old question, but I shall post my answer for posterity...
It depends on the system that you are building and the particular business rules in place.
I am building a moderate to large scale CRM in MongoDb, C# (Backend API), and Angular (Frontend web app) and found ObjectId utterly terrible for use in Angular Routing for selecting particular entities. Same with API Controller routing.
The suggestion above worked perfectly for my project.
db.contacts.insert({
"id":db.contacts.find().Count()+1,
"name":"John Doe",
"emails":[
"john#doe.com",
"john.doe#business.com"
],
"phone":"555111322",
"status":"Active"
});
The reason it is perfect for my case, but not all cases is that as the above comment states, if you delete 3 records from the collection, you will get collisions.
My business rules state that due to our in house SLA's, we are not allowed to delete correspondence data or clients records for longer than the potential lifespan of the application I'm writing, and therefor, I simply mark records with an enum "Status" which is either "Active" or "Deleted". You can delete something from the UI, and it will say "Contact has been deleted" but all the application has done is change the status of the contact to "Deleted" and when the app calls the respository for a list of contacts, I filter out deleted records before pushing the data to the client app.
Therefore, db.collection.find().count() + 1 is a perfect solution for me...
It won't work for everyone, but if you will not be deleting data, it works fine.
Edit
latest versions of pymongo:
db.contacts.count() + 1
First Record should be add
"_id" = 1 in your db
$database = "demo";
$collections ="democollaction";
echo getnextid($database,$collections);
function getnextid($database,$collections){
$m = new MongoClient();
$db = $m->selectDB($database);
$cursor = $collection->find()->sort(array("_id" => -1))->limit(1);
$array = iterator_to_array($cursor);
foreach($array as $value){
return $value["_id"] + 1;
}
}
I had a similar issue, namely I was interested in generating unique numbers, which can be used as identifiers, but doesn't have to. I came up with the following solution. First to initialize the collection:
fun create(mongo: MongoTemplate) {
mongo.db.getCollection("sequence")
.insertOne(Document(mapOf("_id" to "globalCounter", "sequenceValue" to 0L)))
}
An then a service that return unique (and ascending) numbers:
#Service
class IdCounter(val mongoTemplate: MongoTemplate) {
companion object {
const val collection = "sequence"
}
private val idField = "_id"
private val idValue = "globalCounter"
private val sequence = "sequenceValue"
fun nextValue(): Long {
val filter = Document(mapOf(idField to idValue))
val update = Document("\$inc", Document(mapOf(sequence to 1)))
val updated: Document = mongoTemplate.db.getCollection(collection).findOneAndUpdate(filter, update)!!
return updated[sequence] as Long
}
}
I believe that id doesn't have the weaknesses related to concurrent environment that some of the other solutions may suffer from.
// await collection.insertOne({ autoIncrementId: 1 });
const { value: { autoIncrementId } } = await collection.findOneAndUpdate(
{ autoIncrementId: { $exists: true } },
{
$inc: { autoIncrementId: 1 },
},
);
return collection.insertOne({ id: autoIncrementId, ...data });
I used something like nested queries in MySQL to simulate auto increment, which worked for me. To get the latest id and increment one to it you can use:
lastContact = db.contacts.find().sort({$natural:-1}).limit(1)[0];
db.contacts.insert({
"id":lastContact ?lastContact ["id"] + 1 : 1,
"name":"John Doe",
"emails": ["john#doe.com", "john.doe#business.com"],
"phone":"555111322",
"status":"Active"
})
It solves the removal issue of Alex's answer. So no duplicate id will appear if any record is removed.
More explanation: I just get the id of the latest inserted document, add one to it, and then set it as the id of the new record. And ternary is for cases that we don't have any records yet or all of the records are removed.
this could be another approach
const mongoose = require("mongoose");
const contractSchema = mongoose.Schema(
{
account: {
type: mongoose.Schema.Types.ObjectId,
required: true,
},
idContract: {
type: Number,
default: 0,
},
},
{ timestamps: true }
);
contractSchema.pre("save", function (next) {
var docs = this;
mongoose
.model("contract", contractSchema)
.countDocuments({ account: docs.account }, function (error, counter) {
if (error) return next(error);
docs.idContract = counter + 1;
next();
});
});
module.exports = mongoose.model("contract", contractSchema);
// First check the table length
const data = await table.find()
if(data.length === 0){
const id = 1
// then post your query along with your id
}
else{
// find last item and then its id
const length = data.length
const lastItem = data[length-1]
const lastItemId = lastItem.id // or { id } = lastItem
const id = lastItemId + 1
// now apply new id to your new item
// even if you delete any item from middle also this work
}