From the docs:
You can also chain multiple where() methods to create more specific queries (logical AND).
How can I perform an OR query?
Example:
Give me all documents where the field status is open OR upcoming
Give me all documents where the field status == open OR createdAt <= <somedatetime>
OR isn't supported as it's hard for the server to scale it (requires keeping state to dedup). The work around is to issue 2 queries, one for each condition, and dedup on the client.
Edit (Nov 2019):
Cloud Firestore now supports IN queries which are a limited type of OR query.
For the example above you could do:
// Get all documents in 'foo' where status is open or upcmoming
db.collection('foo').where('status','in',['open','upcoming']).get()
However it's still not possible to do a general OR condition involving multiple fields.
With the recent addition of IN queries, Firestore supports "up to 10 equality clauses on the same field with a logical OR"
A possible solution to (1) would be:
documents.where('status', 'in', ['open', 'upcoming']);
See Firebase Guides: Query Operators | in and array-contains-any
suggest to give value for status as well.
ex.
{ name: "a", statusValue = 10, status = 'open' }
{ name: "b", statusValue = 20, status = 'upcoming'}
{ name: "c", statusValue = 30, status = 'close'}
you can query by ref.where('statusValue', '<=', 20) then both 'a' and 'b' will found.
this can save your query cost and performance.
btw, it is not fix all case.
I would have no "status" field, but status related fields, updating them to true or false based on request, like
{ name: "a", status_open: true, status_upcoming: false, status_closed: false}
However, check Firebase Cloud Functions. You could have a function listening status changes, updating status related properties like
{ name: "a", status: "open", status_open: true, status_upcoming: false, status_closed: false}
one or the other, your query could be just
...where('status_open','==',true)...
Hope it helps.
This doesn't solve all cases, but for "enum" fields, you can emulate an "OR" query by making a separate boolean field for each enum-value, then adding a where("enum_<value>", "==", false) for every value that isn't part of the "OR" clause you want.
For example, consider your first desired query:
Give me all documents where the field status is open OR upcoming
You can accomplish this by splitting the status: string field into multiple boolean fields, one for each enum-value:
status_open: bool
status_upcoming: bool
status_suspended: bool
status_closed: bool
To perform your "where status is open or upcoming" query, you then do this:
where("status_suspended", "==", false).where("status_closed", "==", false)
How does this work? Well, because it's an enum, you know one of the values must have true assigned. So if you can determine that all of the other values don't match for a given entry, then by deduction it must match one of the values you originally were looking for.
See also
in/not-in/array-contains-in: https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/query-data/queries#in_and_array-contains-any
!=: https://firebase.googleblog.com/2020/09/cloud-firestore-not-equal-queries.html
I don't like everyone saying it's not possible.
it is if you create another "hacky" field in the model to build a composite...
for instance, create an array for each document that has all logical or elements
then query for .where("field", arrayContains: [...]
you can bind two Observables using the rxjs merge operator.
Here you have an example.
import { Observable } from 'rxjs/Observable';
import 'rxjs/add/observable/merge';
...
getCombinatedStatus(): Observable<any> {
return Observable.merge(this.db.collection('foo', ref => ref.where('status','==','open')).valueChanges(),
this.db.collection('foo', ref => ref.where('status','==','upcoming')).valueChanges());
}
Then you can subscribe to the new Observable updates using the above method:
getCombinatedStatus.subscribe(results => console.log(results);
I hope this can help you, greetings from Chile!!
We have the same problem just now, luckily the only possible values for ours are A,B,C,D (4) so we have to query for things like A||B, A||C, A||B||C, D, etc
As of like a few months ago firebase supports a new query array-contains so what we do is make an array and we pre-process the OR values to the array
if (a) {
array addObject:#"a"
}
if (b) {
array addObject:#"b"
}
if (a||b) {
array addObject:#"a||b"
}
etc
And we do this for all 4! values or however many combos there are.
THEN we can simply check the query [document arrayContains:#"a||c"] or whatever type of condition we need.
So if something only qualified for conditional A of our 4 conditionals (A,B,C,D) then its array would contain the following literal strings: #["A", "A||B", "A||C", "A||D", "A||B||C", "A||B||D", "A||C||D", "A||B||C||D"]
Then for any of those OR combinations we can just search array-contains on whatever we may want (e.g. "A||C")
Note: This is only a reasonable approach if you have a few number of possible values to compare OR with.
More info on Array-contains here, since it's newish to firebase docs
If you have a limited number of fields, definitely create new fields with true and false like in the example above. However, if you don't know what the fields are until runtime, you have to just combine queries.
Here is a tags OR example...
// the ids of students in class
const students = [studentID1, studentID2,...];
// get all docs where student.studentID1 = true
const results = this.afs.collection('classes',
ref => ref.where(`students.${students[0]}`, '==', true)
).valueChanges({ idField: 'id' }).pipe(
switchMap((r: any) => {
// get all docs where student.studentID2...studentIDX = true
const docs = students.slice(1).map(
(student: any) => this.afs.collection('classes',
ref => ref.where(`students.${student}`, '==', true)
).valueChanges({ idField: 'id' })
);
return combineLatest(docs).pipe(
// combine results by reducing array
map((a: any[]) => {
const g: [] = a.reduce(
(acc: any[], cur: any) => acc.concat(cur)
).concat(r);
// filter out duplicates by 'id' field
return g.filter(
(b: any, n: number, a: any[]) => a.findIndex(
(v: any) => v.id === b.id) === n
);
}),
);
})
);
Unfortunately there is no other way to combine more than 10 items (use array-contains-any if < 10 items).
There is also no other way to avoid duplicate reads, as you don't know the ID fields that will be matched by the search. Luckily, Firebase has good caching.
For those of you that like promises...
const p = await results.pipe(take(1)).toPromise();
For more info on this, see this article I wrote.
J
OR isn't supported
But if you need that you can do It in your code
Ex : if i want query products where (Size Equal Xl OR XXL : AND Gender is Male)
productsCollectionRef
//1* first get query where can firestore handle it
.whereEqualTo("gender", "Male")
.addSnapshotListener((queryDocumentSnapshots, e) -> {
if (queryDocumentSnapshots == null)
return;
List<Product> productList = new ArrayList<>();
for (DocumentSnapshot snapshot : queryDocumentSnapshots.getDocuments()) {
Product product = snapshot.toObject(Product.class);
//2* then check your query OR Condition because firestore just support AND Condition
if (product.getSize().equals("XL") || product.getSize().equals("XXL"))
productList.add(product);
}
liveData.setValue(productList);
});
For Flutter dart language use this:
db.collection("projects").where("status", whereIn: ["public", "unlisted", "secret"]);
actually I found #Dan McGrath answer working here is a rewriting of his answer:
private void query() {
FirebaseFirestore db = FirebaseFirestore.getInstance();
db.collection("STATUS")
.whereIn("status", Arrays.asList("open", "upcoming")) // you can add up to 10 different values like : Arrays.asList("open", "upcoming", "Pending", "In Progress", ...)
.addSnapshotListener(new EventListener<QuerySnapshot>() {
#Override
public void onEvent(#Nullable QuerySnapshot queryDocumentSnapshots, #Nullable FirebaseFirestoreException e) {
for (DocumentSnapshot documentSnapshot : queryDocumentSnapshots) {
// I assume you have a model class called MyStatus
MyStatus status= documentSnapshot.toObject(MyStatus.class);
if (status!= null) {
//do somthing...!
}
}
}
});
}
Related
Looking to construct a query against a firestore collection ('parent') where the documents have a nested map (2 logical levels deep). Specifically when the first map has dynamic keys which are not known at the time of running the query. As an example:
Document 1
{
codes: {
abc: {
id: 'hi'
},
def: {
id: 'there'
}
}
}
Document 2
{
codes: {
ghi: {
id: 'you'
},
zmp: {
id: 'guys'
}
}
}
What I would like to do is have a WHERE clause that takes a wildcard for a key in the document. ie.
firestore.collection('parent').WHERE('codes.*.id', '==', 'there')
// Results in Document 1
or
firestore.collection('parent').WHERE('codes.*.id', '==', 'you')
// Results in Document 2
Is there any way to achieve this behavior without having to resort to generating subcollection documents to be used for indexing, or polluting the document itself with a second map that maps ids to codes.
== Not ideal solution 1 (subcollections) ==
Build out the server so that when these documents are filed, a subcollection ('child') is maintained with documents that contain the related information. As an example filing Document 1 above would require filing two documents in the child subcollection:
{
id: 'hi'
code: 'abc'
}
{
id: 'there'
code: 'def'
}
Now we can query for the id we want, and get the parent reference, and follow that all the way back to the parent...
firestore.collectionGroup('child').where('id', '==', 'there')
.get()
.then(snapshot => {
for(const doc of snapshot.docs) {
return doc.ref.parent.parent
}
return Promise.reject('no parents, how sad.')
})
.then(ref => ref.get())
.then(snapshot => snapshot.data())
.then(parent => {
// Thank goodness, the parent is Document 1!
}
The downside to this is maintenance of the sub collections, as well as a number of extra operations against firestore.
== Not ideal solution 2 (model pollution) ==
Another way to achieve this is to implement another map or an array in the document itself which simply contains the ids which would then let us query on those values. ie
{
codes: {
abc: {
id: 'hi'
},
def: {
id: 'there'
}
},
codeids:['hi','there']
}
Although this is easy to query:
.WHERE('codeids', 'ARRAY CONTAINS', 'hi')
I don't like the idea of adding fields that are not meaningful to the consumer of the document (the purpose of the field only being to facilitate a documents ability to be queried due to system constraints)
Open to suggestions!
Is it possible to use the nextval function in a pg-promise multirow insert?
I have a database (that I sadly can't change) where the id has to be inserted via the client like this:
INSERT INTO some_object (object_id, object_name)
VALUES (nextval('some_object_seq'), ${object_name})
RETURNING object_id;
This works fine for one insert. But now I have to insert multiple rows at once and tried pgp.helpers.insert:
const cs = pgp.helpers.ColumnSet(['object_id', 'object_name'], { table });
const query = pgp.helpers.insert(values, cs) + 'RETURNING object_id';
database.many(query).then(data => {
return data
}).catch(error => {
logger.error(error, query);
});
Is there any way to use nextval('some_object_seq') in this scenario? Sadly I can't change the default value of the id column in the table definition.
Your column should be defined as this:
{
name: `object_id`,
init: () => `nextval('some_object_seq')`,
mod: `:raw`
}
As opposed to the answer by #baal, you do not need to use def, because you are not providing a default value, rather a complete override for the value, which is what init for.
And it can be used within upsert queries too.
As Bergi wrote, it is possible to add a default expression to the column set like this:
const cs = pgp.helpers.ColumnSet(
[{
name: "object_id",
// setting the DEFAULT value for this column
def: "nextval('some_object_seq')",
// use raw-text modifier to inject string directly
mod: "^",
}, 'object_name'], { table });
I have the following node js code that should list all items from a DynamoDB table,
import * as dynamoDbLib from "../../libs/dynamodb-lib";
import { success, failure } from "../../libs/response-lib";
export async function main(event, context) {
const params = {
TableName: "brands",
KeyConditionExpression: "brandId = :brandId",
ExpressionAttributeValues: {
":brandId": ''
}
};
try {
const result = await dynamoDbLib.call("query", params);
return success(result.Items);
} catch (e) {
console.log(e);
return failure({ status: false });
}
}
The id is in uuid format which when inserted from my node js was imported by using:
import uuid from "uuid";
then inserted to the table like:
brandId: uuid.v1()
Now when I query the items in the table I can only get only one record if and only if I hard coded the uuid of a record in the expression attribute value (either the KeyConditions or KeyConditionExpression parameter must be specified). So I thought about adding a regular expression to match all the uuids, my regular expression was copied from some solutions on the web but it didn't work, it was like the following:
[a-fA-F0-9]{8}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{4}-[a-fA-F0-9]{12}
and
\b[0-9a-f]{8}\b-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-\b[0-9a-f]{12}\b
and I have tried other examples but non of them worked, is it right to add a regular expression to get all the items, and if so what is the right regex for it?
Use a Scan operation to get all items in a table.
From the AWS Developer Guide:
The scan method reads every item in the table and returns all the data in the table. You can provide an optional filter_expression, so that only the items matching your criteria are returned. However, the filter is applied only after the entire table has been scanned.
I am creating an API with SQL Server as the database. My tables and columns are using Pascal case (CountryId, IsDeleted, etc) that cannot be changed.
So when I do this:
const mssql = require('mssql');
var sqlstr =
'select * from Country where CountryId = #countryId';
var db = await koaApp.getDb();
let result = await db.request()
.input('countryId', mssql.Int, countryId)
.query(sqlstr);
My resulting object is
{
CountryId: 1,
CountryName: "Germany"
}
But I want it to be
{
countryId: 1,
countryName: "Germany"
}
I know there is a "row" event, but I wanted something more performant (since I may be returning several rows from the query, above is just an example).
Any suggestions?
PS: I want to avoid the FOR JSON syntax
Posting this as an actual answer, as it proved helpful to the OP:
if it's viable, you may try simply specifying the columns in the query as such:
select
CountryID countryId,
CountryName countryName
from
Country
where
CountryId = #countryId
Typically it's not best practice to use select * within queries anyways because of performance.
A simple explanation, putting a space and a new name (or perhaps better practice, within square brackets after each column name, such as CountryName [countryName] - this allows for characters such as spaces to be included within the new names) is aliasing the name with a new name of your choosing when returned from SQL.
I'd suggest using the lodash utility library to convert the column names, there is a _.camelCase function for this:
CamelCase documentation
_.camelCase('Foo Bar');
// => 'fooBar'
_.camelCase('--foo-bar--');
// => 'fooBar'
_.camelCase('__FOO_BAR__');
// => 'fooBar'
You can enumerate the result keys using Object.entries then do a reduce, e.g.
let result = {
CountryId: 1,
CountryName: "Germany"
};
let resultCamelCase = Object.entries(result).reduce((obj,[key,value]) => {
obj[_.camelCase(key)] = value;
return obj;
}, {});
console.log(resultCamelCase);
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.11/lodash.js"></script>
I need to increment a column with 1 on some occasions, but the default value of that column is null and not zero. How do I handle this case using sequelize? What method could be utilized?
I could do by checking the column for null in one query and updating it accordingly in the second query using sequelize but I am looking for something better. Could I handle this one call?
I'll confess that I'm not terribly experienced with sequelize, but in general you'll want to utilize IFNULL. Here's what the raw query might look like:
UPDATE SomeTable
SET some_column = IFNULL(some_column, 0) + 1
WHERE <some predicate>
Going back to sequelize, I imagine you're trying to use .increment(), but judging from the related source, it doesn't look like it accepts anything that will do the trick for you.
Browsing the docs, it looks like you might be able to get away with something like this:
SomeModel.update({
some_column: sequelize.literal('IFNULL(some_column, 0) + 1')
}, {
where: {...}
});
If that doesn't work, you're probably stuck with a raw query.
First you need to find the model instance and update via itself, or update directly via Sequelize Static Model API.
Then you'll check whether the updated field got nullable value or not ? If fails then do the manual update as JMar propose above
await model.transaction({isolationLevel: ISOLATION_LEVELS.SERIALIZABLE}, async (tx) => {
const user = await model.User.findOne({
where: {
username: 'username',
},
rejectOnEmpty: true,
transaction: tx,
});
const updatedRecord = await user.increment(['field_tag'], {
transaction: tx,
});
if (!updatedRecord.field_tag) {
/** Manual update & Convert nullable value into Integer !*/
await model.User.update({
field_tag: Sequelize.literal('IFNULL(field_tag, 0) + 1')
}, {
where: {
username: 'username',
},
transaction: tx,
});
}
});