I am trying to Save a Object to MongoDb using morphia which contains fields that have value as empty string. And I don't want those empty string to be saved in mongoDB.
For Example : (Json mentioned)I don't want fields like "addressLine2" , "postalCd2" to be saved in Mongo.
{
"_id" : ObjectId("5cf8d100fe85543cdc1e3183"),
"accountNbr" : "test Acct",
"effectiveDt" : "2019-02-19",
"entryDt" : "2019-06-06",
"expirationDt" : "2020-02-19",
"insuredMailAddress" : {
"stateCd" : "TestCd",
"cityNm" : "testCity",
"addressLine1" : "Test address Line1",
"addressLine2" : "",
"postalCd2" : ""
}
"streamLineRenewInd" : {
"code" : " "
}
}
Is there a way to achieve this.
Morphia does not currently support such a feature. You can, however, filter out the nulls. You'd just need to make sure your application stores a null instead of "".
Related
Here is my robomongo document
{
"_id" : ObjectId("##########"),
"actionname" : "testaction",
"actiontype" : "database.action",
"isshortworkflow" : true,
"processstartedmessage" : "",
"databaseUserName" : "####",
"databasePassword" : "",
"queryTemplate" : "Select * from shop where name=parameters.get("itemName")",
"databaseType" : "MYSQL",
"resultTemplate" : " parameters.get("itemName") + 'has quantity of' + result[0].get('quantity')"
}
Here queryTemplate field is having name=parameres.get("itemName").This is a local function in my java code which is going to return as "item1". The problem is that since it is going to come from mongo db it is not going to execute the paramerters.get("itemName") function. Is there a way to execute the function using the string returning from the mongodb.How can I implement inside mongodb?
suppose I have a data structure in firebase real time database like
{ "donors" :
"uid1" : { "name" : "x", "bloodGroup" : "A+", "location" : "some Place"},
"uid2" : { "name" : "y", "bloodGroup" : "A-", "location" : "some place"},
...
...
}
now if I have millions of donor records like this. how could I filter them based on bloodGroup location and fetching say 100 records from server at a time using angularfire2.
I have found this page which was really helpful to me when using queries to query my firebase data:
https://howtofirebase.com/collection-queries-with-firebase-b95a0193745d
A very simple example would be along the lines of:
this.donorsData = af.database.list('/donors', {
query: {
orderByChild: 'bloodGroup',
equalTo: 'A+',
}
});
Not entirely sure how to fetch 100 records, then another 100, I am using datatables in my app, which fetches all my data and using the datatables for pagination.
I am working on a Node.js app, using Mongoskin and Express.js.
First, here is a simple overview of the MongoDB collection I'm working with :
db.profiles.find()
{ "_id" : ObjectId("5559e6ad8da0dc030010cf64"),
"userid" : "63e9c530-fd60-11e4-a30c-f3b609480e30",
"emailaddr" : { "value" : "x#y.fr", "share" : false },
"fullname" : { "value" : "Azerty Ytreza", "share" : true },
"telnumber" : { "value" : "0606060606", "share" : true }
As you can see, I'm storing multiple objects, following the same architecture (value + boolean)
Depending on what the user will want to share / don't share anymore, I will need to update the "share" value of the good Object.
First, I can't find out how to modify a value stored in an Object.
Referring to this : Modify nested Object value , I thought I could do like this in my Mongoskin requests :
db.collection.update( { _id:...} , { $set: { some_key.param2 : new_info } }
In this case, Node.js is reporting an error, saying "SyntaxError: Unexpected token '.' ".
The thing is that as I said earlier, depending on what the user will want to modify, I won't modify the same "key".
So, I need to build the key name. Example: if the user wants to modify the "share" value of his email address, I will need to update emailaddr.share. But how can I do this using Mongoskin?
I tried different solutions, but it's impossible to do things like :
var key = "emailaddr",
newVal = "true";
key += ".share";
db.collection.update( { _id: ... } { $set: { key : newval } }
Say you want to change the share status of the fullname property :
> var property = "fullname"
> var value = false
You have to dynamically build the object {"fullname.share": false}ยน :
> var updt = {}
> updt[property + ".share"] = value
Then use that object as the parameter to $set:
> db.test.update({"_id" : ObjectId("5559e6ad8da0dc030010cf64")},
... {$set: updt})
// ^^^^
WriteResult({ "nMatched" : 1, "nUpserted" : 0, "nModified" : 1 })
1 As a side note, as explained in the doc the quotes (" or ') are mandatory around the name of an object property if it contains a . -- hence the syntax error you mentioned in your question.
My question is fairly simple. Say that I have a type mapping in an index that looks like this:
"mappings" : {
"post" : {
"analyzer" : "my_custom_analyzer",
"properties" : {
"body" : {
"type" : "string",
"store" : true
}
}
}
}
Note that I specified my_custom_analyzer as the analyzer for the type. When I search the body field without specifying an analyzer in the query, I expect my_custom_analyzer to be used. However, when I use the Analyze API to query the field:
curl http://localhost:9200/myindex/_analyze?field=post.body&text=test
It returns standard analysis results for string. When I specify the analyzer it works:
curl http://localhost:9200/myindex/_analyze?analyzer=my_custom_analyzer&text=test
My question is: why doesn't the Analyze API use the default type analyzer when I specify a field?
Analyzer is per string field.
You cant apply it over an object or nested object and hope all the fields under that object field will inherit that analyzer.
The right approach is as follows -
"mappings" : {
"post" : {
"properties" : {
"body" : {
"type" : "string",
"analyzer" : "my_custom_analyzer",
"store" : true
}
}
}
}
The reason the analyzer worked for analyzer API is because you have declared analyzer for that index.
If you want to define analyzer for all the string fields under a particular object ,you need to mention that in the type template. You can get more information about that here - http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/mapping-root-object-type.html#_dynamic_templates
I have created a node.js module that can already query MongoDB for a set of documents using a find and output those results to JSON. My question is, knowing that node.js is asynchronous, how can I use the results from this query (items) to create a query that goes back to MongoDB to find another set of documents. This query basically returns a list of employee ids that can be used to query documents containing information on those employees(i.e. firstName, lastName etc.). Then output those results instead as JSON. The first query is basically saying, give me all of the employees that can be viewed by a particular user. I then need to take the employee ids and do a query on another set of documents that contains those individuals information, like you see below.
Here are the two documents schema:
Employee
{
"_id" : ObjectId("5208db78ecc00915e0900699"),
"clientId" : 1,
"employeeId" : "12345",
"lastName" : "DOE",
"firstName" : "JOHN",
"middleName" : "A",
"badge" : "8675309",
"birthDate" : "10/12/1978"
}
Users an employee can access (User Cache)
{
"_id" : ObjectId("520920a99bc417b7c5e36abf"),
"clientSystem" : "SystemX",
"customerNumber" : "1",
"clientUserId" : "jdoe3",
"securityCode" : "authorize",
"employeeId" : "12345",
"creationDate" : "2013-Aug-12 13:51:37"
}
Here is my code:
exports.employeeList = function(req, res) {
console.log(req.params);
var clientSystem = req.query["clientSystem"];
var clientUserId = req.query["clientUserId"];
var customerNumber = req.query["customerNumber"];
var securityCode = req.query["securityCode"];
if (clientSystem != null && clientUserId != null && customerNumber != null && securityCode != null){
db.collection('ExtEmployeeList', function(err, collection){
collection.find({'clientSystem': clientSystem, 'clientUserId':clientUserId, 'customerNumber':customerNumber, 'securityCode': securityCode}).toArray(function (err, items){
console.log(items);
res.jsonp(items);
});//close find
});//close collection
}//close if
else {
res.send(400);
}//close else
};//close function
What you're wanting to do is possible, but probably not the most effective use of Mongo. I tend to design Mongo documents around how the data will actually be used. So if I needed the user's names to show up in a list of users I can view, I would embed that data so I don't have to do multiple round trips to mongo to get all the information I need. I would do something like the following:
{
"_id" : ObjectId("520920a99bc417b7c5e36abf"),
"clientSystem" : "SystemX",
"customerNumber" : "1",
"clientUserId" : "jdoe3",
"securityCode" : "authorize",
"employeeId" : "12345",
"creationDate" : "2013-Aug-12 13:51:37"
"employee": {
"_id" : ObjectId("5208db78ecc00915e0900699"),
"clientId" : 1,
"employeeId" : "12345",
"lastName" : "DOE",
"firstName" : "JOHN",
"middleName" : "A",
"badge" : "8675309",
"birthDate" : "10/12/1978"
}
}
Yes, you are duplicating data but you're dramatically reducing the number of round trips to the database. This is typically the tradeoff you make when using document based databases since you can't join tables.