Im new to Mongoose, and i'm facing a problem in searching.
These are my Schemas:
var CommentSchema = new Schema({
body : String
, comments : [CommentSchema]
});
var PostSchema = new Schema({
body : String
, comments : [CommentSchema]
});
There is a deep nesting of comments. When somebody answers to the existing comment, how can I find that one?
you can look at the mongoose test suite on github for examples.
model_querying_test
Here is what you are looking for:
test finding based on embedded document fields:
function () {
var db = start(), BlogPostB = db.model('BlogPostB', collection);
BlogPostB.create({comments: [{title: 'i should be queryable'}]}, function (err, created) {
should.strictEqual(err, null);
BlogPostB.findOne({'comments.title': 'i should be queryable'}, function (err, found) {
should.strictEqual(err, null);
found._id.should.eql(created._id);
db.close();
});
});
},
One solution to this is to store Comments as a separate Model which you can query directly, and store references to the related ObjectIds and paths between Comments and Posts.
Using the Populate feature in Mongoose related documents can function similarly to embedded documents, although there are some important differences in the way you query them, and you have to be more careful to keep the relationships populated.
Set it up like this:
var mongoose = require('mongoose')
, Schema = mongoose.Schema
, ObjectId = Schema.Types.ObjectId;
var PostsSchema = new Schema({
body : String,
stories : [{ type: ObjectId, ref: 'Story' }]
});
var CommentsSchema = new Schema({
body : String,
post : { type: ObjectId, ref: 'Post' },
comments : [{ type: ObjectId, ref: 'Comment' }]
});
var Story = mongoose.model('Post', PostsSchema);
var Comment = mongoose.model('Comment', CommentsSchema);
If you do it this way it requires more queries to get the post with all its comments (which will be slower than being able to load the Post and its complete comment hierarchy with a single query) however you'll be able to query comments directly and retrieve the Post they were made on (but not easily find the full path to the comment when its nested).
These are all trade-offs; the best decision (either to recursively search for comments, or store them independently then recursively load them) should be made in the context of your application and its expected usage patterns.
One other caveat; the populate feature is currently limited to a single-level of linked ObjectIds; you have to call it on each comment that is returned to get the full nested dataset. There are several plugins that help with this, such as mongoose-subpopulate, and soon enough it'll be supported natively in Mongoose - see the github issue here.
Related
I am completely new to the fields of Mongoose and MongoDB.
I am currently trying trying to remove one element from my database.
This is my code so far:
My issueModel:
var mongoose = require('mongoose'); // loading module for mongoose
var db = mongoose.connect('mongodb://localhost/issuedb');
var issueSchema = new mongoose.Schema({
title: String,
description: String,
priority: String,
status: String
});
// Constructor Function:
var issueModel = mongoose.model('issues', issueSchema); // have to give the
name of the collection where the element should be stored + Schema
// Export this Construction Function for this Module:
module.exports = issueModel; // careful: module != model !
My post method for using the delete method:
// creating the router for deleting one item:
router.post('/delete/:id', (req, res) => {
console.log(req.params.id);
issueModel.remove({id: req.params.ObjectId})
.setOptions({ single: true }).exec(function (err, deleted) {})
.then(issues => res.render('issue', {issues: issues}));
The thing i would like to do here is using the object id - which is correctly stored in req.params.ObjectID according to my console.log, and deleting the corresponding object.
But currently , when i have got a table with about 3-4 entries, always the first one gets deleted. Why is that? I am really TOTALLY new and really tried searching a lot, but i could not find any solution until now. I am happy about any tips that would help me.
What am i doing wrong?
The ID in the URL and the Object.ID are the same! Why is the first object deleted then, not the second or the third?
I am hopeless right now.
I also read about the remove() option not being really used in todays time. But we were told at university to use this method right now.
I also tried findOneByID and delete methods i found in the mongoose database.
If you need any more code please let me know!
You can use one of the convenience methods for this: findByIdAndRemove:
issueModel.findByIdAndRemove(req.params.ObjectId, function(err) {
if (err) { ... failed }
});
This will remove a whole document matching the ID which I think its what you want, if you want to a remove property from a document that's a different query.
If you don't use one of the convenience methods which just take IDs (have ById in them), then you have to convert your ID from a string to an ObjectId:
const { ObjectId } = require('mongodb');
issueModel.remove({ id: ObjectId(req.params.ObjectId) }).setOptions({ single: true })
I just use mongoose recently and a bit confused how to sort and paginate it.
let say I make some project like twitter and I had 3 schema. first is user second is post and third is post_detail. user schema contains data that user had, post is more like fb status or twitter tweet that we can reply it, post_detail is like the replies of the post
user
var userSchema = mongoose.Schema({
username: {
type: String
},
full_name: {
type: String
},
age: {
type: Number
}
});
post
var postDetailSchema = mongoose.Schema({
message: {
type: String
},
created_by: {
type: String
}
total_reply: {
type: Number
}
});
post_detail
var postDetailSchema = mongoose.Schema({
post_id: {
type: String
}
message: {
type: String
},
created_by: {
type: String
}
});
the relation is user._id = post.created_by, user._id = post_detail.created_by, post_detail.post_id = post._id
say user A make 1 post and 1000 other users comment on that posts, how can we sort the comment by the username of user? user can change the data(full_name, age in this case) so I cant put the data on the post_detail because the data can change dynamically or I just put it on the post_detail and if user change data I just change the post_detail too? but if I do that I need to change many rows because if the same users comment 100 posts then that data need to be changed too.
the problem is how to sort it, I think if I can sort it I can paginate it too. or in this case I should just use rdbms instead of nosql?
thanks anyway, really appreciate the help and guidance :))
Welcome to MongoDB.
If you want to do it in the way you describe, just don't go for Mongo.
You are designing the schema based on relations and not in documents.
Your design requires to do joins and this does not work well in mongo because there is not an easy/fast way of doing this.
First, I would not create a separate entity for the post details but embedded in the Post document the post details as a list.
Regarding your question:
or I just put it on the post_detail and if user change data I just
change the post_detail too?
Yes, that is what you should do. If you want to be able to sort the documents by the userName you should denormalize it and include in the post_details.
If I had to design the schema, it would be something like this:
{
"message": "blabl",
"authorId" : "userId12",
"total_reply" : 100,
"replies" : [
{
"message" : "okk",
"authorId" : "66234",
"authorName" : "Alberto Rodriguez"
},
{
"message" : "test",
"authorId" : "1231",
"authorName" : "Fina Lopez"
}
]
}
With this schema and using the aggregation framework, you can sort the comments by username.
If you don't like this approach, I rather would go for an RDBMS as you mentioned.
I'm having a problem that is really bugging me. I don't even want to use this solution I don't think but I want to know if there is one.
I was creating a comment section with mongodb and mongoose and keeping the comments attached to the resource like this:
const MovieSchema = new mongoose.Schema({
movieTitle: {type: String, text: true},
year: Number,
imdb: String,
comments: [{
date: Date,
body: String
}]
})
When editing the comments body I understood I could access a nested document like this:
const query = {
imdb: req.body.movie.imdb,
"comments._id": new ObjectId(req.body.editedComment._id)
}
const update = {
$set: {
"comments.$.body": req.body.newComment
}
}
Movie.findOneAndUpdate(query, update, function(err, movie) {
//do stuff
})
I then wanted to roll out a first level reply to comments, where every reply to a comment or to another reply just appeared as an array of replies for the top level comment (sort of like Facebook, not like reddit). At first I wanted to keep the replies attached to the comments just as I had kept the comments attachted to the resource. So the schema would look something like this:
const MovieSchema = new mongoose.Schema({
movieTitle: {type: String, text: true},
year: Number,
imdb: String,
comments: [{
date: Date,
body: String,
replies: [{
date: Date,
body: String
}]
}]
})
My question is how would you go about accessing a nested nested document. For instance if I wanted to edit a reply it doesn't seem I can use two $ symbols. So how would I do this in mongodb, and is this even possible?
I'm pretty sure I'm going to make Comments have its own model to simplify things but I still want to know if this is possible because it seems like a pretty big drawback of mongodb if not. On the other hand I'd feel pretty stupid using mongodb if I didn't figure out how to edit a nested nested document...
according to this issue: https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/SERVER-27089
updating nested-nested elements can be done this way:
parent.update({},
{$set: {“children.$[i].children.$[j].d”: nuValue}},
{ arrayFilters: [{ “i._id”: childId}, { “j._id”: grandchildId }] });
this is included in MongoDB 3.5.12 development version, in the MongoDB 3.6 production version.
according to https://github.com/Automattic/mongoose/issues/5986#issuecomment-358065800 it's supposed to be supported in mongoose 5+
if you're using an older mongodb or mongoose versions, there are 2 options:
find parent, edit result's grandchild, save parent.
const result = await parent.findById(parentId);
const grandchild = result.children.find(child => child._id.equals(childId))
.children.find(grandchild => grandchild._id.equals(grandchildId));
grandchild.field = value;
parent.save();
know granchild's index "somehow", findByIdAndUpdate parent with:
parent.findByIdAndUpdate(id,
{ $set: { [`children.$.children.${index}.field`]: value }});
I understand how to embed documents in Mongoose, and they seem fairly straightforward if storing as arrays, for which the use case is fairly obvious:
var CommentSchema = new Mongoose.Schema({...});
var BlogPostSchema = new Mongoose.Schema({
comments : [CommentSchema],
});
But, what I don't see how to do after looking over the documentation forward and backward, is how to store a single sub-document that doesn't need or want to be in an Array.
var UserSchema = new Mongoose.Schema({...});
var BlogPostSchema = new Mongoose.Schema({
author: ??? // 'UserSchema' and UserSchema do not work here.
});
Is there any way to make this work? I don't want to just store the ObjectId, but rather, store a complete copy of the User record, but don't need or want an array.
You cannot embed schemas in this way, with the reasoning that those child docs would be confused with full documents, see this bug thread, where it is stated:
the reason we haven't added this support in the past is b/c this leaves us wondering if all pre-hooks will be executed the same way for the pseudo-child document as well as it implies that we can call save() on that child.
The answer here is to share not the schema, but just the definition.
var userdef = { name: String };
var UserSchema = new Schema(userdef);
var BlogPostSchema = new Schema({author: userdef});
This would result in a nested user object, without actually nesting the Schema.
Just sharing information doesn't support validation bubbling. And you may need validation of UserSchema also.
Instead I recommend array length validation
author: {type:[UserSchema], validate: function (arr) { return arr.length == 1 }},
UPDATE:
In case anyone comes across this now, as of Mongoose 4.2.0 single embedded subdocuments exist! :)
http://mongoosejs.com/docs/subdocs.html#single-embedded
I have the following mongoose Schema's defined...
var BlogSchema = new Schema({
content: String,
comments:[CommentSchema], //embed the comments
owner: {type: ObjectId , ref: 'User'}
})
var CommentSchema = new Schema({
commentContent : String,
commentPostTime : Number,
likes : [{type: ObjectId , ref: 'User'}],
likeCount: {type: Number, default:0}
})
var UserSchema = new Schema({
})
When a user likes a comment. The user should be added to likes list and the embedded Comment Subdocument in Blog Document should be updated. I am not sure how to achieve this.
Help appreciated.
As your UserSchema doesn't contain much information, it's probably simplest if you don't try to fake a join through Mongoose's population feature. Using MongoDB by itself, accomplishing this would be done with a single operation. Below, I'm just storing the "_id" field of some user document that I want to reference.
> var userID = userdoc._id;
> db.comments.update( { _id : commentID },
{ $push : { likes : userID } } );
Doing this with Mongoose would require you to change your schema slightly:
var CommentSchema = new Schema({
commentContent : String,
commentPostTime : Number,
likes : [ObjectId],
likeCount: {type: Number, default:0}
})
Then, you could just add the new user to the list of likes and increment the likeCount field with the following query:
Comment.findByIdAndUpdate( commentID, { $push : { likes : "samantha" }, $inc : { likeCount : 1 } } );
Is this better than using Mongoose population? Handling your data this way will take an extra step when you look up users from comments. First, you'll have to grab the userID from the list of likes in the comment, then you'll have to run a separate query to get that user's document. However, since your use case doesn't appear to require looking anything up in the user documents, this approach should work well for you. Performance-wise, I believe that this two-step process is what Mongoose is doing under the hood anyway with their population method. Personally, I'm fine with the extra lookup step in exchange for more control over my data.