Is there a way to match a value with every array and sub document inside the document in mongodb collection and return the document
{
"_id" : "2000001956",
"trimline1" : "abc",
"trimline2" : "xyz",
"subtitle" : "www",
"image" : {
"large" : 0,
"small" : 0,
"tiled" : 0,
"cropped" : false
},
"Kytrr" : {
"count" : 0,
"assigned" : 0
}
}
for eg if in the above document I am searching for xyz or "ab" or "xy" or "z" or "0" this document should be returned.
I actually have to achieve this at the back end using C# driver but a mongo query would also help greatly.
Please advice.
Thanks
You could probably do this using '$where'
db.mycollection({$where:"JSON.stringify(this).indexOf('xyz')!=-1"})
I'm converting the whole record to a big string and then searching to see if your element is in the resulting string. Probably won't work if your xyz is in the fieldnames!
You can make it iterate through the fields to make a big string and then search it though.
This isn't the most elegant way and will involve a full tablescan. It will be faster if you look through the individual fields!
While Malcolm's answer above would work, when your collection gets large or you have high traffic, you'll see this fall over pretty quickly. This is because of 2 things. First, dropping down to javascript is a big deal and second, this will always be a full table scan because $where can't use an index.
MongoDB 2.6 introduced text indexing which is on by default (it was in beta in 2.4). With it, you can have a full text index on all the fields in the document. The documentation gives the following example where a text index is created for every field and names the index "TextIndex".
db.collection.ensureIndex(
{ "$**": "text" },
{ name: "TextIndex" }
)
Related
This is the case: A webshop in which I want to configure which items should be listed in the sjop based on a set of parameters.
I want this to be configurable, because that allows me to experiment with different parameters also change their values easily.
I have a Product collection that I want to query based on multiple parameters.
A couple of these are found here:
within product:
"delivery" : {
"maximum_delivery_days" : 30,
"average_delivery_days" : 10,
"source" : 1,
"filling_rate" : 85,
"stock" : 0
}
but also other parameters exist.
An example of such query to decide whether or not to include a product could be:
"$or" : [
{
"delivery.stock" : 1
},
{
"$or" : [
{
"$and" : [
{
"delivery.maximum_delivery_days" : {
"$lt" : 60
}
},
{
"delivery.filling_rate" : {
"$gt" : 90
}
}
]
},
{
"$and" : [
{
"delivery.maximum_delivery_days" : {
"$lt" : 40
}
},
{
"delivery.filling_rate" : {
"$gt" : 80
}
}
]
},
{
"$and" : [
{
"delivery.delivery_days" : {
"$lt" : 25
}
},
{
"delivery.filling_rate" : {
"$gt" : 70
}
}
]
}
]
}
]
Now to make this configurable, I need to be able to handle boolean logic, parameters and values.
So, I got the idea, since such query itself is JSON, to store it in Mongo and have my Java app retrieve it.
Next thing is using it in the filter (e.g. find, or whatever) and work on the corresponding selection of products.
The advantage of this approach is that I can actually analyse the data and the effectiveness of the query outside of my program.
I would store it by name in the database. E.g.
{
"name": "query1",
"query": { the thing printed above starting with "$or"... }
}
using:
db.queries.insert({
"name" : "query1",
"query": { the thing printed above starting with "$or"... }
})
Which results in:
2016-03-27T14:43:37.265+0200 E QUERY Error: field names cannot start with $ [$or]
at Error (<anonymous>)
at DBCollection._validateForStorage (src/mongo/shell/collection.js:161:19)
at DBCollection._validateForStorage (src/mongo/shell/collection.js:165:18)
at insert (src/mongo/shell/bulk_api.js:646:20)
at DBCollection.insert (src/mongo/shell/collection.js:243:18)
at (shell):1:12 at src/mongo/shell/collection.js:161
But I CAN STORE it using Robomongo, but not always. Obviously I am doing something wrong. But I have NO IDEA what it is.
If it fails, and I create a brand new collection and try again, it succeeds. Weird stuff that goes beyond what I can comprehend.
But when I try updating values in the "query", changes are not going through. Never. Not even sometimes.
I can however create a new object and discard the previous one. So, the workaround is there.
db.queries.update(
{"name": "query1"},
{"$set": {
... update goes here ...
}
}
)
doing this results in:
WriteResult({
"nMatched" : 0,
"nUpserted" : 0,
"nModified" : 0,
"writeError" : {
"code" : 52,
"errmsg" : "The dollar ($) prefixed field '$or' in 'action.$or' is not valid for storage."
}
})
seems pretty close to the other message above.
Needles to say, I am pretty clueless about what is going on here, so I hope some of the wizzards here are able to shed some light on the matter
I think the error message contains the important info you need to consider:
QUERY Error: field names cannot start with $
Since you are trying to store a query (or part of one) in a document, you'll end up with attribute names that contain mongo operator keywords (such as $or, $ne, $gt). The mongo documentation actually references this exact scenario - emphasis added
Field names cannot contain dots (i.e. .) or null characters, and they must not start with a dollar sign (i.e. $)...
I wouldn't trust 3rd party applications such as Robomongo in these instances. I suggest debugging/testing this issue directly in the mongo shell.
My suggestion would be to store an escaped version of the query in your document as to not interfere with reserved operator keywords. You can use the available JSON.stringify(my_obj); to encode your partial query into a string and then parse/decode it when you choose to retrieve it later on: JSON.parse(escaped_query_string_from_db)
Your approach of storing the query as a JSON object in MongoDB is not viable.
You could potentially store your query logic and fields in MongoDB, but you have to have an external app build the query with the proper MongoDB syntax.
MongoDB queries contain operators, and some of those have special characters in them.
There are rules for mongoDB filed names. These rules do not allow for special characters.
Look here: https://docs.mongodb.org/manual/reference/limits/#Restrictions-on-Field-Names
The probable reason you can sometimes successfully create the doc using Robomongo is because Robomongo is transforming your query into a string and properly escaping the special characters as it sends it to MongoDB.
This also explains why your attempt to update them never works. You tried to create a document, but instead created something that is a string object, so your update conditions are probably not retrieving any docs.
I see two problems with your approach.
In following query
db.queries.insert({
"name" : "query1",
"query": { the thing printed above starting with "$or"... }
})
a valid JSON expects key, value pair. here in "query" you are storing an object without a key. You have two options. either store query as text or create another key inside curly braces.
Second problem is, you are storing query values without wrapping in quotes. All string values must be wrapped in quotes.
so your final document should appear as
db.queries.insert({
"name" : "query1",
"query": 'the thing printed above starting with "$or"... '
})
Now try, it should work.
Obviously my attempt to store a query in mongo the way I did was foolish as became clear from the answers from both #bigdatakid and #lix. So what I finally did was this: I altered the naming of the fields to comply to the mongo requirements.
E.g. instead of $or I used _$or etc. and instead of using a . inside the name I used a #. Both of which I am replacing in my Java code.
This way I can still easily try and test the queries outside of my program. In my Java program I just change the names and use the query. Using just 2 lines of code. It simply works now. Thanks guys for the suggestions you made.
String documentAsString = query.toJson().replaceAll("_\\$", "\\$").replaceAll("#", ".");
Object q = JSON.parse(documentAsString);
I'm running some queries to a mongodb 2.4.9 server that populate a datatable on a webpage. The user needs to be able to do a substring search across multiple fields, sort the data on various columns, and flip through the results in pages. I have to check multiple fields for matches since the user could be searching for anything related to the documents. There are about 300,000 documents in the collection so the database is relatively small.
I have indexes created for the created_by, requester, desc.name, metaprogram.id, program.id, and arr.programid fields. I've also created indexes [("created", 1), ("created_by", 1), ("requester", 1)] and [("created_by", 1), ("requester", 1)] at the suggestion of Dex.
It's also worth mentioning that documents might not have all of the fields that are being searched for here. Some documents might have a metaprogram.id but not the other ID fields for example.
An example of a query I might run is
{
"$query" : {
"$and" : [
{
"created_by" : {"$ne" : "automation"},
"requester" : {"$in" : ["Broadway", "Spec", "Falcon"] }
},
{
"$or" : [
{"requester" : /month/i },
{"created_by" : /month/i },
{"desc.name" : /month/i },
{"metaprogram.id" : {"$in" : [708, 2314, 709 ] } },
{"program.id" : {"$in" : [708, 2314, 709 ] } },
{"arr.programid" : {"$in" : [708, 2314, 709 ] } }
]
}
]
},
"$orderby" : {
"created" : 1
}
}
with differing orderby, limit, and skip values as well.
Queries on average take 500-1500ms to complete.
I've looked into how to make it faster, but haven't been able to come up with anything. Some of the text searching stuff looks handy but as far as I know each collection only supports at most one text index and it doesn't support pagination (skips). I'm sure that prefix searching instead of regex substring matches would be faster as well but I need substring matching.
Is there anything you can think of to improve the speed of a query like this?
It's quite hard to optimize a query when it's unpredictable.
Analyze how the system is being used and place indexes on the most popular fields.
Use .explain() to make sure the indexes are being used.
Also limit the results returned to a value of 50 or 100. The user doesn't need to see everything at once.
Try upgrading mongodb to see if there's a performance improvement.
Side note:
You might want to consider using ElasticSearch as a search engine instead of Mongodb. ElasticSearch would store the searchable fields and return the Mongodb Ids for matched results. ElasticSearch is a magnitude faster as a search engine than Mongodb.
More info:
How to find queries not using indexes or slow in mongodb
Range query for MongoDB pagination
http://www.elasticsearch.org/overview/
I have a collection with users. Each user has comments. I want to track for some specific users (according to theirs ids) if there is a new comment.
Tailable cursor I guess are what I need but my main problem is that I want to track subdocuments and not documents.
Sample of tracking documents in python:
db = Connection().my_db
coll = db.my_collection
cursor = coll.find(tailable=True)
while cursor.alive:
try:
doc = cursor.next()
print doc
except StopIteration:
time.sleep(1)
One solution is to run intervals every x time and see if the number of the comments has changed. However I do not find the interval solution very appealing. Is there any better way to track changes? Probably with tailable cursors.
PS: I have a comment_id field (which is an ObjectID) in each comment.
Small update:
Since I have the commect_id bson, I can store the biggest (=latest) one in each user. Then run intervals compare the bson if it's still the latest one. I don't mind not to be a precisely real time method. Even 10 minutes of delay is fine. However now I have 70k users and 180k comments but I worry for the scalability of this method.
This would be my solution. Evaluate if it fits your requirement -
I am assuming a data structure as follows
db.user.find().pretty()
{
"_id" : ObjectId("5335123d900f7849d5ea2530"),
"user_id" : 200,
"comments" : [
{
"comment_id" : 1,
"comment" : "hi",
"createDate" : ISODate("2012-01-01T00:00:00Z")
},
{
"comment_id" : 2,
"comment" : "bye",
"createDate" : ISODate("2013-01-01T00:00:00Z")
}
]
}
{
"_id" : ObjectId("5335123e900f7849d5ea2531"),
"user_id" : 201,
"comments" : [
{
"comment_id" : 3,
"comment" : "hi",
"createDate" : ISODate("2012-01-01T00:00:00Z")
},
{
"comment_id" : 4,
"comment" : "bye",
"createDate" : ISODate("2013-01-01T00:00:00Z")
}
]
}
I added createDate attribute to the document. Add an index as follows -
db.user.ensureIndex({"user_id":1,"comments.createDate":-1})
You can search for latest comments with the query -
db.user.find({"user_id":200,"comments.createDate":{$gt:ISODate('2012-12-31')}})
The time used for "greater than" comparison would be last checked time. Since you are using index, the search will be faster. You can follow the same idea of checking in for new comments in some interval.
You can also use UTC time stamp, instead of ISODate. That way you don't have to worry about bson data type.
Note that while creating index on createDate, I have specified descending index.
If you will have too many comments within a user document, over a period of time, I would suggest that, you move comments to a different collection. Use user_id as one of the attributes in the comment document. That will give a better performance in the long run.
I need help incrementing value of all keys in participants without having to know name of the keys inside of it.
> db.conversations.findOne()
{
"_id" : ObjectId("4faf74b238ba278704000000"),
"participants" : {
"4f81eab338ba27c011000001" : NumberLong(2),
"4f78497938ba27bf11000002" : NumberLong(2)
}
}
I've tried with something like
$mongodb->conversations->update(array('_id' => new \MongoId($objectId)), array('$inc' => array('participants' => 1)));
to no avail...
You need to redesign your schema. It is never a good idea to have "random key names". Even though MongoDB is schemaless, it still means you need to have defined key names. You should change your schema to:
{
"_id" : ObjectId("4faf74b238ba278704000000"),
"participants" : [
{ _id: "4f81eab338ba27c011000001", count: NumberLong(2) },
{ _id: "4f78497938ba27bf11000002", count: NumberLong(2) }
]
}
Sadly, even with that, you can't update all embedded counts in one command. There is currently an open feature request for that: https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/SERVER-1243
In order to still update everything, you should:
query the document
update all the counts on the client side
store the document again
In order to prevent race conditions with that, have a look at "Compare and Swap" and following paragraphs.
It is not possible to update all nested elements in one single move in current version of MongoDB. So I can advice to use "foreach {}".
Read realted topic: How to Update Multiple Array Elements in mongodb
I hope this feature will be implemented in next version.
How to get position (index) of selected document in mongo collection?
E.g.
this document: db.myCollection.find({"id":12345})
has index 3 in myCollection
myCollection:
id: 12340, name: 'G'
id: 12343, name: 'V'
id: 12345, name: 'A'
id: 12348, name: 'N'
If your requirement is to find the position of the document irrespective of any order, that is not
possible as MongoDb does not store the documents in specific order.
However,if you want to know the index based on some field, say _id , you can use this method.
If you are strictly following auto increments in your _id field. You can count all the documents
that have value less than that _id, say n , then n + 1 would be index of the document based on _id.
n = db.myCollection.find({"id": { "$lt" : 12345}}).count() ;
This would also be valid if documents are deleted from the collection.
As far as I know, there is no single command to do this, and this is impossible in general case (see Derick's answer). However, using count() for a query done on an ordered id value field seems to work. Warning: this assumes that there is a reliably ordered field, which is difficult to achieve in a concurrent writer case. In this example _id is used, however this will only work with a single writer case.:
MongoDB shell version: 2.0.1
connecting to: test
> use so_test
switched to db so_test
> db.example.insert({name: 'A'})
> db.example.insert({name: 'B'})
> db.example.insert({name: 'C'})
> db.example.insert({name: 'D'})
> db.example.insert({name: 'E'})
> db.example.insert({name: 'F'})
> db.example.find()
{ "_id" : ObjectId("4fc5f040fb359c680edf1a7b"), "name" : "A" }
{ "_id" : ObjectId("4fc5f046fb359c680edf1a7c"), "name" : "B" }
{ "_id" : ObjectId("4fc5f04afb359c680edf1a7d"), "name" : "C" }
{ "_id" : ObjectId("4fc5f04dfb359c680edf1a7e"), "name" : "D" }
{ "_id" : ObjectId("4fc5f050fb359c680edf1a7f"), "name" : "E" }
{ "_id" : ObjectId("4fc5f053fb359c680edf1a80"), "name" : "F" }
> db.example.find({_id: ObjectId("4fc5f050fb359c680edf1a7f")})
{ "_id" : ObjectId("4fc5f050fb359c680edf1a7f"), "name" : "E" }
> db.example.find({_id: {$lte: ObjectId("4fc5f050fb359c680edf1a7f")}}).count()
5
>
This should also be fairly fast if the queried field is indexed. The example is in mongo shell, but count() should be available in all driver libs as well.
This might be very slow but straightforward method. Here you can pass as usual query. Just I am looping all the documents and checking if condition to match the record. Here I am checking with _id field. You can use any other single field or multiple fields to check it.
var docIndex = 0;
db.url_list.find({},{"_id":1}).forEach(function(doc){
docIndex++;
if("5801ed58a8242ba30e8b46fa"==doc["_id"]){
print('document position is...' + docIndex);
return false;
}
});
There is no way that MongoDB can return this as it does not keep documents in order in the database, just like MySQL f.e. doesn't name row numbers.
The ObjectID trick from jhonkola will only work if only one client creates new elements, as the ObjectIDs are generated on the client side, with the first part being a timestamp. There is no guaranteed order if different clients talk to the same server. Still, I would not rely on this.
I also don't quite understand what you are trying to do though, so perhaps mention that in your question? I can then update the answer.
Restructure your collection to include the position of any entry i.e {'id': 12340, 'name': 'G', 'position': 1} then when searching the database collection(myCollection) using the desired position as a query
The queries I use that return the entire collection all use sort to get a reproducible order, find.sort.forEach works with the script above to get the correct index.