I will start off by saying while I am not new to CouchDB, I am new to querying the views using JavaScript and the web.
I have looked at multiple other questions on here, including CouchDB - Queries with params, couchDB queries, Couchdb query with AND operator, CouchDB Querying Dates, and Basic CouchDB Queries, just to list a few.
While all have good information in them, I haven't found one that has my particular problem in it.
I have a view set up like so:
function (docu) {
if(docu.status && docu.doc && docu.orgId.toString() && !docu.deleted){
switch(docu.status){
case "BASE":
emit(docu.name, docu);
break;
case "AIR":
emit(docu.eta, docu);
break;
case "CHECK":
emit(docu.checkTime, docu);
break;
}
}
}
with all documents having a status, doc, orgId, deleted, name, eta, and checkTime. (I changed doc to docu because of my custom doc key.
I am trying to query and emit based on a set of keys, status, doc, orgId, where orgId is an integer.
My jQuery to do this looks like so:
$.couch.db("myDB").view("designDoc/viewName", {
keys : ["status","doc",orgId],
success: function(data) {
console.log(data);
},
error: function(status) {
console.log(status);
}
});
I receive
{"total_rows":59,"offset":59,"rows":[
]}
Sometimes the offset is 0, sometimes it is 59. I feel I must be doing something wrong for this not to be working correctly.
So for my questions:
I did not mention this, but I had to set docu.orgId.toString() because I guess it parses the URL as a string, is there a way to use this number as a numeric value?
How do I correctly view multiple documents based on multiple keys, i.e. if(key1 && key2) emit(doc.name, doc)
Am I doing something obviously wrong that I lack the knowledge to notice?
Thank you all.
You're so very close. To answer your questions
When you're using docu.orgId.toString() in that if-statement you're basically saying: this value must be truthy. If you didn't convert to string, any number, other than 0, would be true. Since you are converting to a string, any value other than an empty string will be true. Also, since you do not use orgId as the first argument in an emit call, at least not in the example above, you cannot query by it at all.
I'll get to this.
A little.
The thing to remember is emit creates a key-value table (that's really all a view is) that you can use to query. Let's say we have the following documents
{type:'student', dept:'psych', name:'josh'},
{type:'student', dept:'compsci', name:'anish'},
{type:'professor', dept:'compsci', name:'kender'},
{type:'professor', dept:'psych', name:'josh'},
{type:'mascot', name:'owly'}
Now let's say we know that for this one view, we want to query 1) everything but mascots, 2) we want to query by type, dept, and name, all of the available fields in this example. We would write a map function like this:
function(doc) {
if (doc.type === 'mascot') { return; } // don't do anything
// allow for queries by type
emit(doc.type, null); // the use of null is explained below
// allow queries by dept
emit(doc.dept, null);
// allow for queries by name
emit(doc.name, null);
}
Then, we would query like this:
// look for all joshs
$.couch.db("myDB").view("designDoc/viewName", {
keys : ["josh"],
// ...
});
// look for everyone in the psych department
$.couch.db("myDB").view("designDoc/viewName", {
keys : ["psych"],
// ...
});
// look for everyone that's a professor and everyone named josh
$.couch.db("myDB").view("designDoc/viewName", {
keys : ["professor", "josh"],
// ...
});
Notice the last query isn't and in the sense of a logical conjunction, it's in the sense of a union. If you wanted to restrict what was returned to documents that were only professors and also joshs, there are a few options. The most basic would be to concatenate the key when you emit. Like
emit('type-' + doc.type + '_name-' + doc.name, null);
You would then query like this: key : ["type-professor_name-josh"]
It doesn't feel very proper to rely on strings like this, at least it didn't to me when I first started doing it, but it is a quite common method for querying key-value stores. The characters - and _ have no special meaning in this example, I simply use them as delimiters.
Another option would be what you mentioned in your comment, to emit an array like
emit([ doc.type, doc.name ], null);
Then you would query like
key: ["professor", "josh"]
This is perfectly fine, but generally, the use case for emitting arrays as keys, is for aggregating returned rows. For example, you could emit([year, month, day]) and if you had a simple reduce function that basically passed the records through:
function(keys, values, rereduce) {
if (rereduce) {
return [].concat.apply([], values);
} else {
return values;
}
}
You could query with the url parameter group_level set to 1 or 2 and start querying by year and month or just year on the exact same view using arrays as keys. Compared to SQL or Mongo it's mad complicated and convoluted, but hey, it's there.
The use of null in the view is really for resource saving. When you query a view, the rows contain an _id that you can use in a second ajax call to get all the documents from, for example, _all_docs.
I hope that makes sense. If you need any clarification you can use the comments and I'll try my best.
Related
Long story short, I'm making a real estate agent chatbot and I just implemented a filter allowing the user to search within a range of numbers (e.g. at least one bedroom, under $2500). In order to do this, I made an entity_range composite entity composed of the range type (e.g. at most, exactly) and the entity itself (unit-currency for price, plus some custom entities like the number of bedrooms). Prior to creating entity_range, the entities themselves worked fine. But now, it seems as though the entity part of entity_range is undefined. See a sample of my code below:
function get_count(req, res) {
console.log("price: " + req.queryResult.parameters["entity_range"]["unit-currency"])
var price, beds, baths, num_filter_funct
if(req.queryResult.parameters["entity_range"]["unit-currency"] != undefined) {
price = req.queryResult.parameters["entity_range"]
console.log("price: " + price)
} else {
console.log("could not find parameter")
}
Before creating entity_range, my code looked exactly the same, except without ["entity_range"] between parameters and ["unit-currency"]. Anyway, this code logs:
price: undefined
could not find parameter
after the input "How many for $2500," with the following diagnostic info:
...
"queryResult": {
"queryText": "how many for $2500",
"parameters": {
"entity_range": [
{
"unit-currency": {
"amount": 2500,
"currency": "USD"
}
}
]
}...
So the entity "unit-currency" is recognized by Dialogflow, but not by my program. entity_range does allow users to not specify a range, so that's not the issue:
see screenshot here.
I would greatly appreciate any advice you have to offer!
That JSON shows entity_range being an array instead of an object. an object.
parameters.entity_range[0][“unit-currency”] should work. Note the [0]. You’ll also want to add some checks before this to make sure enitiy_range exists and it’s length is > 0.
And this part is just a guess but perhaps you mistakenly clicked the “Is List” box for this parameter in dialogflow? I’m checking it would probably make it be an object instead of an array and your existing code would work.
I'm relatively new to NoSQL, but I have been enjoying the journey very much! I am however finding the map-reduce way of life a bit tricky! I need some help with a problem!
I have a database with two types of documents, opening transactions and closing transactions. For replication and offline functionality reasons I cannot merge the data into one document. The opening transaction document looks something like :
{
_id: "transaction-open-randomgeneratedstring",
type: "transactions-open",
vehicle: "vehicle-id",
created: "date string"
}
The closing documents looks something like:
{
_id: "transaction-close-randomgeneratedstring",
type: "transactions-close",
openid: "transaction-open-randomgeneratedstring",
created: "date string"
}
The randomgeneratedstring of a closing transactions match the randomgeneratedstring of the corresponding opening transaction.
I need a map-reduce to give me the list of open transactions that does not have a corresponding closing transaction. This will basically give me a list of outstanding transactions.
This is the map-reduce I have thus far, but it is not doing the job.
{
"map": function(doc) {
if(doc.type == "transactions-open") {
emit([doc._id, 0], "OPEN");
}
if(doc.type == "transactions-close"){
emit([doc.openid, 1], "CLOSE");
}
},
"reduce": function(keys, values, rereduce) {
var unique_labels = {};
var open = {};
keys.forEach(function(label) {
if(!unique_labels[label[0]]) {
unique_labels[label[0]] = true;
} else {
open[label[0]] = true;
}
});
return open;
}
}
I am open for changes in the _id naming / structure, but I cannot combine the two documents into one.
Thanks!
EDIT
Based on response from Hod, I changed the reduce to look like:
function(keys, values, rereducer)
{
if(values.length == 1)
return true;
}
This is certainly a step in the right direction, but the unwanted transactions are still in the result set, the value is only null. Is there no way to get those out of the result set?
As described - what you would do with a Join in SQL you do with a reduce in CouchDB. Code something like this - not tested:
{
"map": function(doc) {
if(doc.type == "transactions-open") {
emit([doc._id], 1);
}
if(doc.type == "transactions-close"){
emit([doc.openid], -1);
}
},
"reduce": "_sum";
}
So we emit a 1 for an open transaction under an ID and a -1 for a close under the same ID. Now when you reduce you will get a result for each ID of:
-1 = Closed with no record of an open (error condition).
0 = Opened and Closed
1 = Open and not yet closed.
The problem is with the keys parameter in your reduce function. The reduce phase is not called once with all possible keys. It's called per distinct key, and based on the group_level you specify.
Looking at your code, if you haven't specified any group_level, your reduce function is going to get called for every document separately.
Because you're emitting the id of the open transaction doc for both open and close markers, if you grouped at the first level, you'd get open or open/close pairs. You're still only getting a reduction on a limited set of docs at a time.
You could fix this either in your logic calling the query, or by emitting a key that let's you reduce on the entire set at once. (I imagine there are other ways too. These are the ones that come to mind.)
If you use the key approach, you'd need to emit something that looked like ["transaction", doc._id, 0]. Then a first level grouping would give you the whole transaction set like you're current code expects.
EDIT (Adding information based on edit of question.)
The reduce function is going to get called with whatever grouping you set up. It's always going to return something, even if it's just no results emitted (i.e. null).
If you don't want to handle that in the logic that's running the queries and processing the results, you need to use an approach that will allow you to group all the transaction documents together, instead of just the documents for a single transaction.
Based on what you've done so far, another approach would be to forgo the reduce phase and just look at the number of results returned by a query that's limited to the unique doc id.
I've run into a bit of an issue with some data that I'm storing in my MongoDB (Note: I'm using mongoose as an ODM). I have two schemas:
mongoose.model('Buyer',{
credit: Number,
})
and
mongoose.model('Item',{
bid: Number,
location: { type: [Number], index: '2d' }
})
Buyer/Item will have a parent/child association, with a one-to-many relationship. I know that I can set up Items to be embedded subdocs to the Buyer document or I can create two separate documents with object id references to each other.
The problem I am facing is that I need to query Items where it's bid is lower than Buyer's credit but also where location is near a certain geo coordinate.
To satisfy the first criteria, it seems I should embed Items as a subdoc so that I can compare the two numbers. But, in order to compare locations with a geoNear query, it seems it would be better to separate the documents, otherwise, I can't perform geoNear on each subdocument.
Is there any way that I can perform both tasks on this data? If so, how should I structure my data? If not, is there a way that I can perform one query and then a second query on the result from the first query?
Thanks for your help!
There is another option (besides embedding and normalizing) for storing hierarchies in mongodb, that is storing them as tree structures. In this case you would store Buyers and Items in separate documents but in the same collection. Each Item document would need a field pointing to its Buyer (parent) document, and each Buyer document's parent field would be set to null. The docs I linked to explain several implementations you could choose from.
If your items are stored in two separate collections than the best option will be write your own function and call it using mongoose.connection.db.eval('some code...');. In such case you can execute your advanced logic on the server side.
You can write something like this:
var allNearItems = db.Items.find(
{ location: {
$near: {
$geometry: {
type: "Point" ,
coordinates: [ <longitude> , <latitude> ]
},
$maxDistance: 100
}
}
});
var res = [];
allNearItems.forEach(function(item){
var buyer = db.Buyers.find({ id: item.buyerId })[0];
if (!buyer) continue;
if (item.bid < buyer.credit) {
res.push(item.id);
}
});
return res;
After evaluation (place it in mongoose.connection.db.eval("...") call) you will get the array of item id`s.
Use it with cautions. If your allNearItems array will be too large or you will query it very often you can face the performance problems. MongoDB team actually has deprecated direct js code execution but it is still available on current stable release.
I'm trying to perform a 'doesNotContainAllObjectsInArray' type operation on Azure Mobile Services. For example, let's say I have a table called Number and within that table are these records with these 'number' values: 11111, 22222, 33333, 44444.
I want to be able to write a query that will allow me to pass in an array of numbers that I specifically don't want, for example: [11111,44444] should yield me with [22222, 33333].
I've tried using JavaScript in my where operator, but I'm getting an error back stating that the expression isn't supported. This is what I've tried:
var numberTable = tables.getTable('Number');
var ignoreNumbers = ['11111', '44444'];
numberTable.where(function(numbers) {
return (numbers.indexOf(this.number) > -1);
}, ignoreNumbers).read({
success: function(foundNumbers) {
console.log('Found ' + foundNumbers.length + ' numbers!');
},
error: function(error) {
console.error('Error with query! ' + error);
}
});
Note: I can't hard code the ignoreNumbers values, since that array is produced from a previous query.
Can anyone recommend how I might go about executing a query like this? Would I need build a SQL statement and execute it with mssql? (...is that even possible with Table Storage?)
You are describing the SQL Except operator which isn't supported in Table Queries. The only way I've found to do this is to load the table into memory (often not feasible due to size) and then use LINQ to do an Except query.
I managed to solve this by creating a SQL query and executing it through the request.service.mssql object, something like this:
SELECT * FROM Number WHERE (number != '11111' && number != '22222')
The WHERE part of the query is built by iterating the ignoreNumbers array and building the SQL statement by string concatenation.
Not sure if it's the most efficient thing in the world, but in reality there are only going to be a couple of numbers (maybe 5-10) and so far it seems to work.
OK, I'm missing something here and I just can't seem to find it because the logic seems correct to me, but I'm certain I'm not seeing the error.
var VisibleMarkers = function() {
var filtered = _.reject(Gmaps.map.markers, function(marker) {
return marker.grade != $('.mapDataGrade').val() && !_.contains(marker.subjects,$('.mapDataSubjects').val())
});
return filtered
}
I'm using underscore.js and jQuery to simplify my javascript work.
So right now, I'm checking by means of selects which data gets to be rejected and then I display the filtered markers on the (google) map (if it helps at all, this is using gmaps4rails which is working perfectly fine, its this bit of javascript that's making me lose the last of the hairs on my head).
Currently, the code functions 100% correctly for the ".mapDataGrade" select, but the ".mapDataSubjects" isn't. Now the markers object has a json array of the subjects (this is for students) and each item in the array has its ID. Its this ID that I am supposed to be checking.
Can someone see what I'm doing wrong?
If there's more info that needs to be included, please let me know.
This is on plain javascript on a RoR application using gmaps4rails
Now the markers object has a json array of the subjects (this is for students) and each item in the array has its ID. Its this ID that I am supposed to be checking.
_.contains compares a values, but it sounds like you want your iterator to compare a value to an object's "id" property. For that, _.some would work; it's like contains, except that, instead of comparing values, you can write the comparison as a function:
Returns true if any of the values in the list pass the iterator truth test.
Here's how you'd use it:
!_.some(marker.subjects, function(subject) {
return subject.id == $('.mapDataSubjects').val();
})
If I'm right, the whole line should be like this:
return marker.grade != $('.mapDataGrade').val() &&
// check that none of the subjects is a match
!_.some(marker.subjects, function(subject) {
// the current subject is a match if its ID matches the selected value
return subject.id == $('.mapDataSubjects').val();
});