I've got an array like that
Word array (
{
translation = (
{
name = Roma;
lang = it;
},
{
name = Rome;
lang = en;
}
);
type = provenance;
value = RMU;
},
{
translation = (
{
name = "Milano";
lang = it;
},
{
name = "Milan";
lang = en;
}
);
type = destination;
value = MIL;
},)
The idea is to filter it using an NSPredicate and receive and an array of dictionaries based on the lang key, I'd like to get something like this made by filtering for lang == it,
Word array (
{
name = Roma;
lang = it;
type = provenance;
value = RMU;
},
{
name = "Milano";
lang = it;
type = destination;
value = MIL;
})
I can't simplify the data because it comes from a "JSON" service.
I've tried different predicates using SUBQUERY but none of them works, documentation about SUBQUERY is pretty poor, I'm missing something, probably the problem is that I'd like to receive an object that is really different from the source.
Of course I'm able to obtain that structure enumerating, I'm wondering if there is a shorter solution
This answer from Dave DeLong link to SUBQUERY explanation gave a me a lot of hints about SUBQUERY, but I'm not able to find a solution to my problem.
Can someone give me a hints about?
You can't do this with a predicate. (Well, you could, but it would be stupidly complex, difficult to understand and maintain, and in the end it would be easier to write the code yourself)
NSPredicate is for extracting a subset of data from an existing set. It only* does filtering, because a predicate is simply a statement that evaluates to true or false. If you have a collection and filter it with a predicate, then what happens is the collection starts iterating over its elements and asks the predicate: "does this pass your test?" "does this pass your test?" "does this pass your test?"... Every time that the predicate answers "yes this passes my test", the collection adds that object to a new collection. It is that new collection that is returned from the filter method.
THUS:
NSPredicate does not (easily) allow for merging two sets of data (which is what you're asking for). It is possible (because you can do pretty much anything with a FUNCTION() expression), but it makes for inherently unreadable predicates.
SO:
Don't use NSPredicate to merge your dataset. Do it yourself.
Related
I have in my index a list of object, each of them has an objectID value.
On some search, i want to filter OUT a certain number of them, using there objectID.
For the moment it works with one value as a string, i would like to know how to do for multiple value.
filters = 'NOT objectID:' + objectIDToFilter;
This work for one object, what can i do to apply this for an array of ObjectID. because :
filters = 'NOT objectID:' + arrayObjectID;
does not work.
I was thinking of generating a huge string with an arrayId.map with all my 'NOT objectID:1 AND NOT objectID: 2 ...' but i wanted to know if there is a cleaner way to do it.
I unfortunately misunderstood the line in algolia doc :
Array Attributes: Any attribute set up as an array will match the filter as soon as one of the values in the array match.
This apparently refers to the value itself in Algolia and not the filter
So i did not found a solution on algolia doc, i went for the long string, hope there is no limits on how much filter we can add on a query (found nothing about that).
Here is what i did if someone need it :
let filters = `NOT objectID:${userID}`;
blockedByUsers.map((blockedByUser) => {
filters = filters + ` AND NOT objectID:${blockedByUser}`;
});
If you need to add multiple but don't have a starting point like i do, you can't start the query with an AND , a solution i found to bypass that:
let filters = `NOT objectID:${blockedByUsers[0]}`;
blockedByUsers.map((blockedByUser, i) => {
if (i > 0) filters = filters + ` AND NOT objectID:${blockedByUser}`;
});
There is probably a cleaner solution, but this work. If you have found other solution for that problems i'll be happy to see :)
I'm working on Stanford CS193p's SmashTag Popularity Mentions assignment (asst. #5) and I've got everything working well. I'm working on Extra Task #3:
Loading up a lot of data by querying for an existing instance in the database, then inserting if not found over and over again, one by one (like we did in lecture), can be pretty poor performing. Enhance your application to make this more efficient by checking for the existence of a pile of things you want to be in the database in one query (then only creating the ones that don’t exist). The predicate operator IN might be of value here.
I've managed to do something like this, but not using the IN predicate operator! This is inside the perform block of my updateDatabase(with newTweets:) method: (I've called my core data entity CDTweet
if let databaseTweets = try? globalContext!.fetch(NSFetchRequest<CDTweet>(entityName: "CDTweet")) {
let databaseIDs = databaseTweets.map { $0.id! }
for twitterInfo in newTweets where !databaseIDs.contains(twitterInfo.id) {
_ = CDTweet.createCDTweet(with: twitterInfo, into: globalContext!)
}
}
As you can see, I get all the tweets in the database, get their IDs, and then only create a new tweet for internet-fetched-Twitter.Tweets whose IDs are not in the array of database tweets.
This appears to function properly (i.e., create only the new tweets), but I am very curious how the instructor imagined it would work with the IN predicate operator. Has anyone done this and can lend some insight?
Note: A number of solutions I've seen have a core data entity for the Search Term (usually called Query). I don't have this, only entities for Tweet and Mention, and I have everything working fine.
You need something like this (i assume searchIDs is an array of values you are looking for):
var searchIDs = // ... an array of IDs you are searching for
var fetchRequest = NSFetchRequest<CDTweet>(entityName: "CDTweet")
let predicate = NSPredicate(format: "id IN %#", searchIDs)
fetchRequest.predicate = predicate
databaseTweets = try? globalContext!.fetch(fetchRequest) {
// here you should only get all entries with IDs in the newTweets array
}
Details about predicates can be found here, about predicate syntax especially here
I am learning how to use MongoEngine and MongoDB, and I know how to query over Listfield(EmbeddedDocumentField) from this question:
can't query over ListField(EmbeddedDocumentField)
Sort of nasty. Kind of wish there was something easier than that.
I know how to change the name of an agent using the same example from the link:
Agent.objects(name="Brenna Li").update_one(set__name="Brenna Smith")
But how can I change a value inside an embedded document in a listfield? For example, what is the code I need to change Brenna Li's skill level in C++ from a 6 to a 8 and her skill level in Java from 4 to a 5?
You can use the positional operator $ or S in mongoengine (so it can be used as a keyword argument). However, you can only update a single match at a time. Making it impossible to update both the Java and C++ levels in a single query - without replacing the whole Skills list (which wouldnt be very safe).
To do it in two queries you could do something like:
class Skill(EmbeddedDocument):
name = StringField(required = True)
level = IntField(required = True)
class Agent(Document):
name = StringField(required = True)
email = EmailField(required = True, unique = True)
skills = ListField(EmbeddedDocumentField(Skill))
Agent.drop_collection()
Agent(name="Brenna Li", email="br#example.com",
skills=[Skill(name="Java", level=2),
Skill(name="Surfing", level=6),
Skill(name="c++", level=4)]).save()
Agent.objects.filter(name="Brenna Li", skills__name="Java").update(set__name="Brenna Smith", inc__skills__S__level=1)
Agent.objects.filter(name="Brenna Smith", skills__name="c++").update(inc__skills__S__level=1)
I'm new to Couchbase and am struggling to get a composite index to do what I want it to. The use-case is this:
I have a set of "Enumerations" being stored as documents
Each has a "last_updated" field which -- as you may have guessed -- stores the last time that the field was updated
I want to be able to show only those enumerations which have been updated since some given date but still sort the list by the name of the enumeration
I've created a Couchbase View like this:
function (doc, meta) {
var time_array;
if (doc.doc_type === "enum") {
if (doc.last_updated) {
time_array = doc.last_updated.split(/[- :]/);
} else {
time_array = [0,0,0,0,0,0];
}
for(var i=0; i<time_array.length; i++) { time_array[i] = parseInt(time_array[i], 10); }
time_array.unshift(meta.id);
emit(time_array, null);
}
}
I have one record that doesn't have the last_updated field set and therefore has it's time fields are all set to zero. I thought as a first test I could filter out that result and I put in the following:
startkey = ["a",2012,0,0,0,0,0]
endkey = ["Z",2014,0,0,0,0,0]
While the list is sorted by the 'id' it isn't filtering anything! Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong? Is there a better composite view to achieve these results?
In couchbase when you query view by startkey - endkey you're unable to filter results by 2 or more properties. Couchbase has only one index, so it will filter your results only by first param. So your query will be identical to query with:
startkey = ["a"]
endkey = ["Z"]
Here is a link to complete answer by Filipe Manana why it can't be filtered by those dates.
Here is a quote from it:
For composite keys (arrays), elements are compared from left to right and comparison finishes as soon as a element is different from the corresponding element in the other key (same as what happens when comparing strings à la memcmp() or strcmp()).
So if you want to have a view that filters by date, date array should go first in composite key.
My web application runs on MongoDB, using python and pyMongo. I get this scenario a lot - code that reads something like:
from pymongo import Connnection
users = Connection().db.users
def findUsers(firstName=None, lastName=None, age=None):
criteria = {}
if firstName:
criteria['firstName'] = firstName
if lastName:
criteria['lastName'] = lastName
if age:
criteria['age'] = age
query = users.find(criteria)
return query
I find that kind of messy how I need an if statement for every value that's optional to figure out if it's needs to go into the search criteria. If only there were a special query value that mongo ignored in queries. Then my code could look like this:
def findUsers(firstName=<ignored by mongo>, lastName=<ignored by mongo>, age=<ignored by mongo>):
query = users.find({'firstName':firstName, 'lastName':lastName, 'age':age})
return query
Now isn't that so much cleaner than before, especially if you have many more optional parameters. Any parameters that aren't specified default to something mongo just ignores. Is there any way to do this? Or at-least something more concise than what I currently have?
You're probably better off filtering your empty values in Python. You don't need a separate if-statement for each of your values. The local variables can be accessed by locals(), so you can create a dictionary by filtering out all keys with None value.
def findUsers(firstName=None, lastName=None, age=None):
loc = locals()
criteria = {k:loc[k] for k in loc if loc[k] != None}
query = users.find(criteria)
Note that this syntax uses dictionary comprehensions, introduced in Python 2.7. If you're running an earlier version of Python, you need to replace that one line with
criteria = dict((k, loc[k]) for k in loc if loc[k] != None)