I made a beer matching dating app for a school assignment. Unfortunately am I having a bit of trouble finding out how to search in my database on a template injected number as object.
I've tried this I read on MongoDB docs
The database looks like this :
beerProfile: Object
↳24589: Object
↳name: "Heineken"
img: "https://untappd.akamaized.net/site/beer_logos/beer94130_52756_sm.jpeg"
description: "Heinken is a beer"
bid:"24589"
So beerProfile is an object and has the object 24589 inside it. Inside the 24589 object are name, imd, description and bid.
I tried to use the find() function. ( the collection is called users )
db.collection('users').find( { [24589]: [{name: [Heineken]}] }, { name: 1, bid: 1 }, done);
And I also tried :
db.collection('users').find( { $text: { $search: 24589 } }, done);
I would like to make it return the object values of the 24589 object. Does anyone how I can achieve this ?
I think your "schema" became unnecessarily complex by using a variable (24589) as a key. You should change it to something like this:
beerProfile: Object
↳beer: Object
↳name: "Heineken"
img: "https://untappd.akamaized.net/site/beer_logos/beer94130_52756_sm.jpeg"
description: "Heinken is a beer"
bid:"24589"
Then you can use a simple find():
db.collection('users').find( { "beer.bid": "24589"})
Related
I'm looking for a solution, using MongoDB, to regroup/aggregate/whateverthenameis a specific field present in each collection inside a new collection or view.
It is my first time using MongoDB so I'm not familiar with it. What the project I've joined has, is a MongoDB database with multiple collections that save the same kind of information but from different provider.
Each collection has the field called "legalInformation" that has a name and an identifier. What we actually have in our project is an other collection, called name-id that duplicates informations from the provider's collection legalInformation. The purpose of the name-id collection is to centralize every name-id in the app, regardless of the provider. But I think that we could create a collection/view instead of programmatically duplicates those data.
I don't know what MongoDB can offer to me to achieve this. I would like to have a way to fetch and aggregate all the legalInformation from all the providers inside on collection/view.
As anyone an idea about how I could do this ?
To illustrate, this is a representation of the DB schema:
providerA({
legalInformations: { name: ..., id: ... },
specificDataFromProviderA: { ... }
})
providerB({
legalInformations: { name: ..., id: ... },
specificDataFromProviderB: { ... }
})
providerC({
legalInformations: { name: ..., id: ... },
specificDataFromProviderC: { ... }
})
and I want a simple collection/view called legalInformation that aggregates all legalInformations
legalInformation({
name: ...,
id: ...
})
Thanks !
I just started using Primsa 2 so I am still a noob at this but all I am trying to do is create a flat array of strings(Array<number>) based on the values I get from a specific field. Right now when I target that field it gives me an array of objects like this: userIds: [{ issueId: 1, userId: 1 }]
All I want is the value I get from the userId key and the array to return like this userIds: [ 1 ]. I was able to fix this with some formatting code after the query which was done like so:
const issues = project.issues.map(issue => ({ ...issue, userIds: [...issue.userIds.map((id) => id.userId)] }))
const _project = { ...project, issues }
However, this doesn't seem like the most optimal solution. If this is the only way that is fine but I assume with the power that Prisma has for querying, this is something I can do just in the query alone?
For reference, my query currently looks like this:
const project = await prisma.project.findFirst({
where: { id: req.currentUser.projectId },
include: { users: true, issues: { include: { userIds: true } } },
})
Thanks in advance!
Can you show your schema? Perhaps you can model the relation differently. However, unless if you provide a field, userIds, that is a flat array and not a field of a an other relation it will be returned as a list of objects as you have already.
My Mongoose schema:
// set up the schema
var CategorySubSchema = new Schema({
name: { type: String },
_category_main : { type: String, ref: 'CategoryMain' }
},
And my controller code:
CategorySub.create({
name : req.body.name,
_category_main : req.body.category_main
}, function(err, data){
An entry in my db:
{
"_id": "54dd163434d78ae58f6b1a69",
"name": "Snacks",
"_category_main": "54dcf4a71dfecb4d86ddcb87",
"__v": 0
},
So I used an underscore, because I was following an example. Does this mean anything to the database or is it just convention for references?
Also, instead of passing the entire JSON object in the request - req.body.category_main, why not just pass and id and change my schema to this?:
var CategorySubSchema = new Schema({
name: { type: String },
category_main_id : { type: String }
},
In short, Yes.
The below schema definition is an example of Manual references.
var CategorySubSchema = new Schema({
name: { type: String },
category_main_id : { type: String }
}
where,
you save the _id field of one document in another document as a
reference. Then your application can run a second query to return the
related data. These references are simple and sufficient for most use
cases.
In this case, we need to write explicit application code to fetch the referred document and resolve the reference. Since the driver that we use wouldn't know about the collection in which the referred document is present nor the database in which the referred document is present.
When you define the schema as below, this is an example of storing the details of the referred document .(Database references)
var CategorySubSchema = new Schema({
name: { type: String },
_category_main : { type: String, ref: 'CategoryMain' }
}
They include the name of the collection, and in some cases the
database name, in addition to the value from the _id field.
These details allow various drivers to resolve the references by themselves, since the name of the collection and the database(optional) of the referred document would be contained in the document itself, rather than we writing explicit application code to resolve the references.
So I used an underscore, because I was following an example. Does this mean anything to the database or is it just convention for
references?
Using underscore in the _id field is a valid naming convention, but mongoDb doesn't explicitly mention about the naming convention of other fields which are used to resolve references. You could just use any other field name as long as it conforms to this.
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 have some data in MongoDB that looks like this:
{
name: "Steve",
location: {
city: "Nowhere, IL",
country: "The United States of Awesome"
}
}
I’m using objects to organize common data structures (like locations), which in Mongoose might map nicely to Schemas. Unfortunately, they don't appear to really work in Mongoose.
If I just embed an object, like this:
{
name: String,
location: {
city: String,
country: String
}
}
It appears to work, but exhibits some bizarre behavior that causes problems for me (e.g. instance.location.location returns location, and subobjects inherit methods from the parent schema). I started a thread on the Mongoose list, but it hasn’t seen any action.
If I embed a Schema, like this:
{
name: String,
location: new Schema({
city: String,
country: String
})
}
…my application doesn’t start (Schema isn’t a type supported by Mongoose). Ditto for
{
name: String,
location: Object
}
…which wouldn’t be ideal, anyway.
Am I missing something or do my schemas not jive with Mongoose?
I did something similar:
var Topic = new Schema({
author : ObjectId
, title : String
, body : String
, topics : [Topic]
});
This worked fine in my tests. However, removing the array brakets resulted in an error. Looks like a bug to me.
https://github.com/LearnBoost/mongoose/blob/master/lib/mongoose/schema.js#L185
Dumping types, I only get String, Number, Boolean, DocumentArray, Array, Date, ObjectId, Mixed -- which appears to be on purpose, schema/index.js doesn't look like it dynamically registers new Schemas to the list of types, so I am guessing this isn't a supported use case, yet.
https://github.com/LearnBoost/mongoose/issues/188
"Embedding single docs is out of the question. It's not a good idea (just use regular nested objects)"
Josh
It looks like this was a bug, it’s been fixed in Mongoose 2.0!