I am doing a pagination with firestore, the problem is that even if I change the startAt it still brings the same results.
An example of my problem
const snaps = await db.collection('blogs').
.orderBy('createdAt')
.startAt(0)
.limit(5).get();
const snaps2 = await db.collection('blogs').
.orderBy('createdAt')
.startAt(5)
.limit(5).get();
let billList = []
let billList2 = []
snaps.forEach(x => billList.push(x.data()) )
snaps2.forEach(x => billList.push(x.data()) )
console.log(billList)
console.log(billList2)
The pagination API doesn't work the way you are expecting. It startAt() doesn't accept an integer offset. As you can see from the linked API documentation, it requires either:
A DocumentReference of the document to start at
A array of field values relative to the order of the query (themselves also typically taken from documents
The paging API doesn't work with offsets at all. You can't skip ahead by N documents at a time. What you have to do is read N documents, then read the next N documents, and so on. I suggest reading the documentation on pagination for specific examples. Note that the first example is not requesting an offset of 1000000 - it's actually asking to start with cities at or above a population field value of 1000000.
I would really appreciate if someone could help me with something: I need to make a normal query to the database but, as my collection is very large (10000 documents) I need to do the query and use $limit and $skip. That part I solved but now I want to have a count to all the documents, even if the returned ones are less. The output should be something like this:
{
count: 1150,
data: [/*length of 50*/]
}
Could anyone help please? Thank you very much.
Since you mentioned you are making a normal query, its not wise to go for aggregation. find() will be a much better option here. Instead you can use the find query itself. The commands to do this in mongoDB console is shown below:
> var docs = db.collection.find().skip(10).limit(50)
> docs.count()
189000
> docs.length()
50
You can do this using one query itself. In Node.js and Express.js, you will have to use it like this to be able to use the "count" function along with the toArray's "result".
var curFind = db.collection('tasks').find({query});
Then you can run two functions after it like this (one nested in the other)
curFind.count(function (e, count) {
// Use count here
curFind.skip(0).limit(10).toArray(function(err, result) {
// Use result here and count here
});
});
I don't think it is possible in a single query to get the total count of the result along with the paginated data without using aggregation.
You can probably achieve this via aggregation but since you mentioned, your collection is very large, you should avoid it and break the query into two parts. I'm providing you an example of considering user collection having a rating field with more than 10,000 records:
var finalResult = {};
var query = {
rating: {$gt: 2}
};
// Get first 50 records of users having rating greater than 2
var users = db.user.find(query).limit(50).skip(0).toArray();
// Get total count of users having rating greater than 2
var totalUsers = db.user.cound(query);
finalResult.count = totalUsers;
finalResult.data = users;
And your final output can be like:
finalResult == {
count: 1150,
data: [/*length of 50 users*/]
}
Hope, this make sense to you. Some of the famous technologies like Grails internally do that to achieve pagination.
Another cleaner approach could be:
var finalResult = {};
var query = {
rating: {$gt: 2}
};
var cursor = db.user.find(query).limit(50).skip(0);
// Get total count of users having rating greater than 2
// By default, the count() method ignores the effects of the cursor.skip() and cursor.limit()
finalResult.count = cursor.count();;
finalResult.data = cursor.toArray();
As mentioned by Sarath Nair you can use count, as it ignores skip and limit. Check: MongoDB Count
By the way, this is duplication from another StackOverflow question: Limiting results in MongoDB but still getting the full count?
I'm trying to test out Firebase to allow users to post comments using push. I want to display the data I retrieve with the following;
fbl.child('sell').limit(20).on("value", function(fbdata) {
// handle data display here
}
The problem is the data is returned in order of oldest to newest - I want it in reversed order. Can Firebase do this?
Since this answer was written, Firebase has added a feature that allows ordering by any child or by value. So there are now four ways to order data: by key, by value, by priority, or by the value of any named child. See this blog post that introduces the new ordering capabilities.
The basic approaches remain the same though:
1. Add a child property with the inverted timestamp and then order on that.
2. Read the children in ascending order and then invert them on the client.
Firebase supports retrieving child nodes of a collection in two ways:
by name
by priority
What you're getting now is by name, which happens to be chronological. That's no coincidence btw: when you push an item into a collection, the name is generated to ensure the children are ordered in this way. To quote the Firebase documentation for push:
The unique name generated by push() is prefixed with a client-generated timestamp so that the resulting list will be chronologically-sorted.
The Firebase guide on ordered data has this to say on the topic:
How Data is Ordered
By default, children at a Firebase node are sorted lexicographically by name. Using push() can generate child names that naturally sort chronologically, but many applications require their data to be sorted in other ways. Firebase lets developers specify the ordering of items in a list by specifying a custom priority for each item.
The simplest way to get the behavior you want is to also specify an always-decreasing priority when you add the item:
var ref = new Firebase('https://your.firebaseio.com/sell');
var item = ref.push();
item.setWithPriority(yourObject, 0 - Date.now());
Update
You'll also have to retrieve the children differently:
fbl.child('sell').startAt().limitToLast(20).on('child_added', function(fbdata) {
console.log(fbdata.exportVal());
})
In my test using on('child_added' ensures that the last few children added are returned in reverse chronological order. Using on('value' on the other hand, returns them in the order of their name.
Be sure to read the section "Reading ordered data", which explains the usage of the child_* events to retrieve (ordered) children.
A bin to demonstrate this: http://jsbin.com/nonawe/3/watch?js,console
Since firebase 2.0.x you can use limitLast() to achieve that:
fbl.child('sell').orderByValue().limitLast(20).on("value", function(fbdataSnapshot) {
// fbdataSnapshot is returned in the ascending order
// you will still need to order these 20 items in
// in a descending order
}
Here's a link to the announcement: More querying capabilities in Firebase
To augment Frank's answer, it's also possible to grab the most recent records--even if you haven't bothered to order them using priorities--by simply using endAt().limit(x) like this demo:
var fb = new Firebase(URL);
// listen for all changes and update
fb.endAt().limit(100).on('value', update);
// print the output of our array
function update(snap) {
var list = [];
snap.forEach(function(ss) {
var data = ss.val();
data['.priority'] = ss.getPriority();
data['.name'] = ss.name();
list.unshift(data);
});
// print/process the results...
}
Note that this is quite performant even up to perhaps a thousand records (assuming the payloads are small). For more robust usages, Frank's answer is authoritative and much more scalable.
This brute force can also be optimized to work with bigger data or more records by doing things like monitoring child_added/child_removed/child_moved events in lieu of value, and using a debounce to apply DOM updates in bulk instead of individually.
DOM updates, naturally, are a stinker regardless of the approach, once you get into the hundreds of elements, so the debounce approach (or a React.js solution, which is essentially an uber debounce) is a great tool to have.
There is really no way but seems we have the recyclerview we can have this
query=mCommentsReference.orderByChild("date_added");
query.keepSynced(true);
// Initialize Views
mRecyclerView = (RecyclerView) view.findViewById(R.id.recyclerView);
mManager = new LinearLayoutManager(getContext());
// mManager.setReverseLayout(false);
mManager.setReverseLayout(true);
mManager.setStackFromEnd(true);
mRecyclerView.setHasFixedSize(true);
mRecyclerView.setLayoutManager(mManager);
I have a date variable (long) and wanted to keep the newest items on top of the list. So what I did was:
Add a new long field 'dateInverse'
Add a new method called 'getDateInverse', which just returns: Long.MAX_VALUE - date;
Create my query with: .orderByChild("dateInverse")
Presto! :p
You are searching limitTolast(Int x) .This will give you the last "x" higher elements of your database (they are in ascending order) but they are the "x" higher elements
if you got in your database {10,300,150,240,2,24,220}
this method:
myFirebaseRef.orderByChild("highScore").limitToLast(4)
will retrive you : {150,220,240,300}
In Android there is a way to actually reverse the data in an Arraylist of objects through the Adapter. In my case I could not use the LayoutManager to reverse the results in descending order since I was using a horizontal Recyclerview to display the data. Setting the following parameters to the recyclerview messed up my UI experience:
llManager.setReverseLayout(true);
llManager.setStackFromEnd(true);
The only working way I found around this was through the BindViewHolder method of the RecyclerView adapter:
#Override
public void onBindViewHolder(final RecyclerView.ViewHolder holder, int position) {
final SuperPost superPost = superList.get(getItemCount() - position - 1);
}
Hope this answer will help all the devs out there who are struggling with this issue in Firebase.
Firebase: How to display a thread of items in reverse order with a limit for each request and an indicator for a "load more" button.
This will get the last 10 items of the list
FBRef.child("childName")
.limitToLast(loadMoreLimit) // loadMoreLimit = 10 for example
This will get the last 10 items. Grab the id of the last record in the list and save for the load more functionality. Next, convert the collection of objects into and an array and do a list.reverse().
LOAD MORE Functionality: The next call will do two things, it will get the next sequence of list items based on the reference id from the first request and give you an indicator if you need to display the "load more" button.
this.FBRef
.child("childName")
.endAt(null, lastThreadId) // Get this from the previous step
.limitToLast(loadMoreLimit+2)
You will need to strip the first and last item of this object collection. The first item is the reference to get this list. The last item is an indicator for the show more button.
I have a bunch of other logic that will keep everything clean. You will need to add this code only for the load more functionality.
list = snapObjectAsArray; // The list is an array from snapObject
lastItemId = key; // get the first key of the list
if (list.length < loadMoreLimit+1) {
lastItemId = false;
}
if (list.length > loadMoreLimit+1) {
list.pop();
}
if (list.length > loadMoreLimit) {
list.shift();
}
// Return the list.reverse() and lastItemId
// If lastItemId is an ID, it will be used for the next reference and a flag to show the "load more" button.
}
I'm using ReactFire for easy Firebase integration.
Basically, it helps me storing the datas into the component state, as an array. Then, all I have to use is the reverse() function (read more)
Here is how I achieve this :
import React, { Component, PropTypes } from 'react';
import ReactMixin from 'react-mixin';
import ReactFireMixin from 'reactfire';
import Firebase from '../../../utils/firebaseUtils'; // Firebase.initializeApp(config);
#ReactMixin.decorate(ReactFireMixin)
export default class Add extends Component {
constructor(args) {
super(args);
this.state = {
articles: []
};
}
componentWillMount() {
let ref = Firebase.database().ref('articles').orderByChild('insertDate').limitToLast(10);
this.bindAsArray(ref, 'articles'); // bind retrieved data to this.state.articles
}
render() {
return (
<div>
{
this.state.articles.reverse().map(function(article) {
return <div>{article.title}</div>
})
}
</div>
);
}
}
There is a better way. You should order by negative server timestamp. How to get negative server timestamp even offline? There is an hidden field which helps. Related snippet from documentation:
var offsetRef = new Firebase("https://<YOUR-FIREBASE-APP>.firebaseio.com/.info/serverTimeOffset");
offsetRef.on("value", function(snap) {
var offset = snap.val();
var estimatedServerTimeMs = new Date().getTime() + offset;
});
To add to Dave Vávra's answer, I use a negative timestamp as my sort_key like so
Setting
const timestamp = new Date().getTime();
const data = {
name: 'John Doe',
city: 'New York',
sort_key: timestamp * -1 // Gets the negative value of the timestamp
}
Getting
const ref = firebase.database().ref('business-images').child(id);
const query = ref.orderByChild('sort_key');
return $firebaseArray(query); // AngularFire function
This fetches all objects from newest to oldest. You can also $indexOn the sortKey to make it run even faster
I had this problem too, I found a very simple solution to this that doesn't involved manipulating the data in anyway. If you are rending the result to the DOM, in a list of some sort. You can use flexbox and setup a class to reverse the elements in their container.
.reverse {
display: flex;
flex-direction: column-reverse;
}
myarray.reverse(); or this.myitems = items.map(item => item).reverse();
I did this by prepend.
query.orderByChild('sell').limitToLast(4).on("value", function(snapshot){
snapshot.forEach(function (childSnapshot) {
// PREPEND
});
});
Someone has pointed out that there are 2 ways to do this:
Manipulate the data client-side
Make a query that will order the data
The easiest way that I have found to do this is to use option 1, but through a LinkedList. I just append each of the objects to the front of the stack. It is flexible enough to still allow the list to be used in a ListView or RecyclerView. This way even though they come in order oldest to newest, you can still view, or retrieve, newest to oldest.
You can add a column named orderColumn where you save time as
Long refrenceTime = "large future time";
Long currentTime = "currentTime";
Long order = refrenceTime - currentTime;
now save Long order in column named orderColumn and when you retrieve data
as orderBy(orderColumn) you will get what you need.
just use reverse() on the array , suppose if you are storing the values to an array items[] then do a this.items.reverse()
ref.subscribe(snapshots => {
this.loading.dismiss();
this.items = [];
snapshots.forEach(snapshot => {
this.items.push(snapshot);
});
**this.items.reverse();**
},
For me it was limitToLast that worked. I also found out that limitLast is NOT a function:)
const query = messagesRef.orderBy('createdAt', 'asc').limitToLast(25);
The above is what worked for me.
PRINT in reverse order
Let's think outside the box... If your information will be printed directly into user's screen (without any content that needs to be modified in a consecutive order, like a sum or something), simply print from bottom to top.
So, instead of inserting each new block of content to the end of the print space (A += B), add that block to the beginning (A = B+A).
If you'll include the elements as a consecutive ordered list, the DOM can put the numbers for you if you insert each element as a List Item (<li>) inside an Ordered Lists (<ol>).
This way you save space from your database, avoiding unnecesary reversed data.
Am working on a windows store javascript application. The application uses data from azure mobile services.
Consider the below code:
var itemTable = mobileService.getTable('item');
//item is the table name stored in the azure database
The code fetches the entire table item and saves it to a variable itemTable.
What code will return the no of rows present in itemTable??
What you're looking for is the includeTotalCount method on the table/query object (unfortunately it's missing from the documentation, I'll file a bug to the product team to have it fixed).
When you call read on the query object, it will return by default 50 (IIRC, the number may be different) elements from it, to prevent a naïve call from returning all elements in a very large table (thus either incurring the outbound bandwidth cost for reserved services, or hitting the quota for free ones). So getting all the elements in the table, and getting the length of the results may not be accurate.
If all you want is the number of elements in the table, you can use the code below: returning zero elements, and the total count.
var table = client.getTable('tableName');
table.take(0).includeTotalCount().read().then(function (results) {
var count = results.totalCount;
new Windows.UI.Popups.MessageDialog('Total count: ' + count).showAsync();
});
If you want to query some elements, and also include the total count (i.e., for paging), just add the appropriate take() and skip() calls, and also the includeTotalCount as well.
If anybody comes here and interested in how to get the totalCount only on C# (like me), then this is how you do it:
var table = MobileService.GetTable<T> ();
var query = table.Take(0).IncludeTotalCount();
IList<T> results = await query.ToListAsync ();
long count = ((ITotalCountProvider)results).TotalCount;
Credit goes to this blog post here
You need to execute read() on the table query and then get the length of the results.
var items, numItems;
itemTable.read().then(function(results) { items = results; numItems = items.length; });
If you are only showing a record count and not the entire results - you should just select the ID column to reduce the amount of data transmitted. I don't see a count() method available yet in the JS Query API to fill this need.
var itemTable = mobileService.getTable('item').select('itemID');