I am using the native method of sails-mongo to query a collection. I need to use native to access some of the Mongo geospatial query features.
I would like to use the sails populate syntax to include associated models.
Is there a way to do this?
Here is an example of my existing code:
Trip.native(function(err, collection) {
collection.find(
{
"locationTo": {
"$near": {
"$maxDistance": 80467.35439432222,
"$geometry": {
"type": "Point",
"coordinates": [-117.133655, 32.720519]
}
}
}
}
)
.toArray(function(err, trips) {
console.log("Trips nearby:", trips);
});
});
Here is my Trip model for reference.
var Trip = {
attributes: {
owner: {
model: 'User'
},
title: 'string',
addressFrom: 'string',
locationFrom: 'json', // geoJson
dateTimeDepart: 'datetime',
dateTimeArrive: 'datetime',
dateTimeReturn: 'datetime',
addressTo: 'string',
locationTo: 'json', // geoJson
driver: {
model: 'User'
},
status: {
type: 'string',
defaultsTo: 'PENDING'
}
}
}
Would be helpful if you share the Trip model as well. If the field you wish to populate has type "collection" (not "array"), you should be able to populate it just fine.
Update: Alright, I got your question wrong. There doesn't seem to be any way of populating directly after a native call. There's really not much you can do with a native call as far as Waterline functions are concerned. I would suggest either running another query(Waterline) after you've fetched locationTo or populating the fields yourself since you only need to populate two of them(and that too from the same model). I can't think of anything that would suffice with a single query.
Thanks, I ended up doing it in two queries for now.
First, I build an array of matching ID's via the native query.
var tripIdList = trips.map(function (trip) {
return trip._id
});
Second, I do a normal find query using the ID list. It's not a single query but works well. Thanks for the help
Trip.find(filter)
.where({id: tripIdList})
.populate('driver')
.exec(function (err, trips) {
console.log("Trips:", trips);
}
Related
In my Stacks schema i have a dimensions property defined as such:
dimensions: {
type: [String],
autoform: {
options: function() {
return Dimensions.find().map(function(d) {
return { label: d.name, value: d._id };
});
}
}
}
This works really well, and using Mongol I'm able to see that an attempt to insert data through the form worked well (in this case I chose two dimensions to insert)
However what I really what is data that stores the actual dimension object rather than it's key. Something like this:
[
To try to achieve this I changed type:[String] to type:[DimensionSchema] and value: d._id to value: d. The thinking here that I'm telling the form that I am expecting an object and am now returning the object itself.
However when I run this I get the following error in my console.
Meteor does not currently support objects other than ObjectID as ids
Poking around a little bit and changing type:[DimensionSchema] to type: DimensionSchema I see some new errors in the console (presumably they get buried when the type is an array
So it appears that autoform is trying to take the value I want stored in the database and trying to use that as an id. Any thoughts on the best way to do this?.
For reference here is my DimensionSchema
export const DimensionSchema = new SimpleSchema({
name: {
type: String,
label: "Name"
},
value: {
type: Number,
decimal: true,
label: "Value",
min: 0
},
tol: {
type: Number,
decimal: true,
label: "Tolerance"
},
author: {
type: String,
label: "Author",
autoValue: function() {
return this.userId
},
autoform: {
type: "hidden"
}
},
createdAt: {
type: Date,
label: "Created At",
autoValue: function() {
return new Date()
},
autoform: {
type: "hidden"
}
}
})
According to my experience and aldeed himself in this issue, autoform is not very friendly to fields that are arrays of objects.
I would generally advise against embedding this data in such a way. It makes the data more difficult to maintain in case a dimension document is modified in the future.
alternatives
You can use a package like publish-composite to create a reactive-join in a publication, while only embedding the _ids in the stack documents.
You can use something like the PeerDB package to do the de-normalization for you, which will also update nested documents for you. Take into account that it comes with a learning curve.
Manually code the specific forms that cannot be easily created with AutoForm. This gives you maximum control and sometimes it is easier than all of the tinkering.
if you insist on using AutoForm
While it may be possible to create a custom input type (via AutoForm.addInputType()), I would not recommend it. It would require you to create a template and modify the data in its valueOut method and it would not be very easy to generate edit forms.
Since this is a specific use case, I believe that the best approach is to use a slightly modified schema and handle the data in a Meteor method.
Define a schema with an array of strings:
export const StacksSchemaSubset = new SimpleSchema({
desc: {
type: String
},
...
dimensions: {
type: [String],
autoform: {
options: function() {
return Dimensions.find().map(function(d) {
return { label: d.name, value: d._id };
});
}
}
}
});
Then, render a quickForm, specifying a schema and a method:
<template name="StacksForm">
{{> quickForm
schema=reducedSchema
id="createStack"
type="method"
meteormethod="createStack"
omitFields="createdAt"
}}
</template>
And define the appropriate helper to deliver the schema:
Template.StacksForm.helpers({
reducedSchema() {
return StacksSchemaSubset;
}
});
And on the server, define the method and mutate the data before inserting.
Meteor.methods({
createStack(data) {
// validate data
const dims = Dimensions.find({_id: {$in: data.dimensions}}).fetch(); // specify fields if needed
data.dimensions = dims;
Stacks.insert(data);
}
});
The only thing i can advise at this moment (if the values doesnt support object type), is to convert object into string(i.e. serialized string) and set that as the value for "dimensions" key (instead of object) and save that into DB.
And while getting back from db, just unserialize that value (string) into object again.
I created a Sails application with two models Publication and Worksheet. They are having a one-to-one relationship. Sails-postgresql is the adapter I'm using. I'm using waterline orm to fire query to the database. I'm When I am trying to load publications data along with worksheet and then sort the records depending on a field in the Worksheet using sort() I'm getting an error.
My model is:
Publication.js
module.exports = {
attributes: {
id: {
type: 'integer'
unique: true
},
worksheetId: {
type: 'integer',
model : 'worksheet'
},
status: {
type: 'string',
defaultsTo: 'active',
in : ['active', 'disabled'],
}
}
}
Worksheet.js
module.exports = {
attributes: {
id: {
type: 'integer',
unique: true
},
name: 'string',
orderWeight: {
type: 'integer',
defaultsTo: 0
}
}
}
So now I want to load all the publication where status is "active" and populate worksheet in the data.
So I'm executing the query:
Publication.find({
where: {
status: 'active'
}
})
.populate('worksheetId').limit(1)
.exec(function (error, publications) {
})
And I'm getting a data like :
{
id : 1,
status : "active",
worksheetId : {
id : 1
name : "test",
orderWeight : 10
}
}
So till now it's all working fine. Now I want to increase the limit to 10 and want to sort the data depending on "orderWeight" which is in the populated data. Initially I sorted the whole data depending on publication id and the query worked.
Publication.find({
where: {
status: 'active'
}
})
.populate('worksheetId').sort('id ASC').limit(10)
.exec(function (error, publications) {
})
So I fired similar query to sort the data on "orderWeight"
Publication.find({
where: {
status: 'active'
}
})
.populate('worksheetId').sort('worksheetId.orderWeight ASC').limit(10)
.exec(function (error, publications) {
})
And this query is giving me error that worksheetId.orderWeight is not a column on the publication table. So I want to fire this sort query on the populated data not on the publication table.
Please let me know how I can get my expected result.
Apart from sort() method I also want to run some find command to the populated data to get those publication where the worksheet name matches with certain key as well.
Basically, what you're trying to do, is query an association's attribute. This has been in the waterline roadmap since 2014, but it's still not supported, so you'll have to figure out a workaround.
One option is to query the Worksheet model, and populate the Publication, since sails doesn't let you query across models without using raw queries (i.e. .sort('worksheetId.orderWeight ASC') doesn't work). Unfortunately, you might have to move the active flag to the Worksheet. For example:
Worksheet.find({
status: 'active'
})
.populate('publication') // you should also add publication to Worksheet.js
.sort('orderWeight ASC')
.limit(10)
Alternatively, you could combine Worksheet and Publication into one model, since they're one-to-one. Probably not ideal, but sails.js and Waterline make it very difficult to work with relational data - I'd estimate that half of the queries in the project I'm working on are raw queries due to sails' poor support of postgres. The framework is pretty biased towards using MongoDB, although it claims to "just work" with any of the "supported" DBs.
Does Moongoose 3.8.8 (the lastest version) support $position (http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/reference/operator/update/position/) operator from MongoDB 2.6.0?
In the following code example the new elements is inserted in the end of the array userActivity.activities:
model:
var userActivity = new schema({
userId: {type:String, required:true, unique:true},
activities: [activity]
});
var activity = new schema({
act: {type: Number, required:true},
});
query:
var activity = { act: 1 };
model.userActivity.update(
{ _id: dbact._id },
{ $push: { activities: {
$each: [ activity ],
$position: 0
}
}
},
function (err, numAffected) {
if (!err) {
// do something
}
});
This actually doesn't matter and never matters for any "framework" implementation and I do not mind explaining why.
Every single "framework" ( such as Mongoose, Mongoid, Doctrine, MongoEngine, etc, etc, etc ) are all basically built upon a basic "driver" implementation that has in most cases been developedby the MongoDB staff themselves. So the basic functionality is always ther even if you need to "delve" down to a level in order to use those "native" methods.
So here would be the native usage example in this case:
List.collection.update(
{},
{ "$push": {
"list": {
"$each": [ 1, 2, 3 ],
"$position": 0 }
}
},function(err,NumAffected) {
console.log("done");
});
Note the "collection" method used from the model, which is getting the "raw" collection details from the driver. So you are using it's method and not some "wrapped" method that may be doing additional processing.
The next and most basic reason is if you cannot find the method and application of the operators that you need the here is a simple fact.
Every single operation as used by the methods in every framework and basic driver method is essentially a call to the "runCommand" method in the basic API. So since that basic call is available everywhere ( in some form or another, because it has to be ), then you can do everything that you find advertised on the MongoDB site with every language implementation on any framework.
But the short call to your particular request is, since this is not actually a method call but is simply part of the BSON arguments as passed in, then of course there is no restriction by a particular language driver to actually use this.
So you can use these new argument without of course updating to the most recent version. But you probably will get some nice methods to do so if you actually do.
Yes, you should be able to use it directly as Mongoose will pass through the update clause:
Model.update(
query, /* match the document */
{ $push:
{ yourArrayField:
{
$each: [ 1, 2, 3 ],
$position: 0
}
}
}, function (err, res) { /* callback */ });
The above would insert the values 1, 2, 3 at the front of the array named yourArrayField.
As it's just a pass-through, you'll need to make sure it works with the server version that you're connecting the client to.
I have a Collection that has documents with an array of nested objects.
Here is fixture code to populate the database:
if (Parents.find().count() == 0) {
var parentId = Parents.insert({
name: "Parent One"
});
Children.insert({
parent: parentId,
fields: [
{
_id: new Meteor.Collection.ObjectID(),
position: 3,
name: "three"
},
{
_id: new Meteor.Collection.ObjectID(),
position: 1,
name: "one"
},
{
_id: new Meteor.Collection.ObjectID(),
position: 2,
name: "two"
},
]
});
}
You might be asking yourself, why do I even need an ObjectID when I can just update based off of the names. This is a simplified example to a much more complex schema that I'm currently working on and the the nested object are going to be created dynamically, the ObjectID's are definitely going to be necessary to make this work.
Basically, I need a way to save those nested objects with a unique ID and be able to update the fields by their _id.
Here is my Method, and the call I'm making from the browser console:
Meteor.methods({
upChild: function( options ) {
console.log(new Meteor.Collection.ObjectID());
Children.update({_id: options._id, "fields._id": options.fieldId }, {$set: {"fields.$.position": options.position}}, function(error){
if(error) {
console.log(error);
} else {
console.log("success");
}
});
}
});
My call from the console:
Meteor.call('upChild', {
_id: "5NuiSNQdNcZwau92M",
fieldId: "9b93aa1ef3868d762b84d2f2",
position: 1
});
And here is a screenshot of the html where I'm rendering all of the data for the Parents and Children collections:
Just an observation, as I was looking how generate unique IDs client side for a similar reason. I found calling new Meteor.Collection.ObjectID() was returning a object in the form 'ObjectID("abc...")'. By assigning Meteor.Collection.ObjectID()._str to _id, I got string as 'abc...' instead, which is what I wanted.
I hope this helps, and I'd be curious to know if anyone has a better way of handling this?
Jason
Avoid using the _str because it can change in the future. Use this:
new Meteor.Collection.ObjectID().toHexString() or
new Meteor.Collection.ObjectID().valueOf()
You can also use the official random package:
Random.id()
I'm using MongoDB as a log keeper for my app to then sync mobile clients. I have this models set up in NodeJS:
var UserArticle = new Schema({
date: { type: Number, default: Math.round((new Date()).getTime() / 1000) }, //Timestamp!
user: [{type: Schema.ObjectId, ref: "User"}],
article: [{type: Schema.ObjectId, ref: "Article"}],
place: Number,
read: Number,
starred: Number,
source: String
});
mongoose.model("UserArticle",UserArticle);
var Log = new Schema({
user: [{type: Schema.ObjectId, ref: "User"}],
action: Number, // O => Insert, 1 => Update, 2 => Delete
uarticle: [{type: Schema.ObjectId, ref: "UserArticle"}],
timestamp: { type: Number, default: Math.round((new Date()).getTime() / 1000) }
});
mongoose.model("Log",Log);
When I want to retrive the log I use the follwing code:
var log = mongoose.model('Log');
log
.where("user", req.session.user)
.desc("timestamp")
.populate("uarticle")
.populate("uarticle.article")
.run(function (err, articles) {
if (err) {
console.log(err);
res.send(500);
return;
}
res.json(articles);
As you can see, I want mongoose to populate the "uarticle" field from the Log collection and, then, I want to populate the "article" field of the UserArticle ("uarticle").
But, using this code, Mongoose only populates "uarticle" using the UserArticle Model, but not the article field inside of uarticle.
Is it possible to accomplish it using Mongoose and populate() or I should do something else?
Thank you,
From what I've checked in the documentation and from what I hear from you, this cannot be achieved, but you can populate the "uarticle.article" documents yourself in the callback function.
However I want to point out another aspect which I consider more important. You have documents in collection A which reference collection B, and in collection B's documents you have another reference to documents in collection C.
You are either doing this wrong (I'm referring to the database structure), or you should be using a relational database such as MySQL here. MongoDB's power relies in the fact you can embed more information in documents, thus having to make lesser queries (having your data in a single collection). While referencing something is ok, having a reference and then another reference doesn't seem like you're taking the full advantage of MongoDB here.
Perhaps you would like to share your situation and the database structure so we could help you out more.
You can use the mongoose-deep-populate plugin to do this. Usage:
User.find({}, function (err, users) {
User.deepPopulate(users, 'uarticle.article', function (err, users) {
// now each user document includes uarticle and each uarticle includes article
})
})
Disclaimer: I'm the author of the plugin.
I faced the same problem,but after hours of efforts i find the solution.It can be without using any external plugin:)
applicantListToExport: function (query, callback) {
this
.find(query).select({'advtId': 0})
.populate({
path: 'influId',
model: 'influencer',
select: { '_id': 1,'user':1},
populate: {
path: 'userid',
model: 'User'
}
})
.populate('campaignId',{'campaignTitle':1})
.exec(callback);
}
Mongoose v5.5.5 seems to allow populate on a populated document.
You can even provide an array of multiple fields to populate on the populated document
var batch = await mstsBatchModel.findOne({_id: req.body.batchId})
.populate({path: 'loggedInUser', select: 'fname lname', model: 'userModel'})
.populate({path: 'invoiceIdArray', model: 'invoiceModel',
populate: [
{path: 'updatedBy', select: 'fname lname', model: 'userModel'},
{path: 'createdBy', select: 'fname lname', model: 'userModel'},
{path: 'aircraftId', select: 'tailNum', model: 'aircraftModel'}
]});
how about something like:
populate_deep = function(type, instance, complete, seen)
{
if (!seen)
seen = {};
if (seen[instance._id])
{
complete();
return;
}
seen[instance._id] = true;
// use meta util to get all "references" from the schema
var refs = meta.get_references(meta.schema(type));
if (!refs)
{
complete();
return;
}
var opts = [];
for (var i=0; i<refs.length; i++)
opts.push({path: refs[i].name, model: refs[i].ref});
mongoose.model(type).populate(instance, opts, function(err,o){
utils.forEach(refs, function (ref, next) {
if (ref.is_array)
utils.forEach(o[ref.name], function (v, lnext) {
populate_deep(ref.ref_type, v, lnext, seen);
}, next);
else
populate_deep(ref.ref_type, o[ref.name], next, seen);
}, complete);
});
}
meta utils is rough... want the src?
or you can simply pass an obj to the populate as:
const myFilterObj = {};
const populateObj = {
path: "parentFileds",
populate: {
path: "childFileds",
select: "childFiledsToSelect"
},
select: "parentFiledsToSelect"
};
Model.find(myFilterObj)
.populate(populateObj).exec((err, data) => console.log(data) );