I am new to arangodb, i have the following document under collection named posts
{_id:56687,
userid: "usr32",
postcontent: "text here",
comment: [{usrid:"usr32",msg:"good post",date:"date"},{usrid:"usr32",msg:"good post",date:"date"}]
}
Basically this document corresponds to a facebook wall like post and will take multiple comments from various users. Can someone please help with aql query to push data into this array?
AQL should be able to identify the document based on _id field, which i was able to do with ease, the problem is pushing new comment into the array
I use nodejs
found a solution, donno if there is a better one
for p in posts filter p._key=='56687' let arr = push(p.comment,'nice video') update p with {comment: arr} in posts
Related
We have two indexes: posts and users. We'd like to make queries on these two indexes, search for a post in the index "posts" and then go to the index "users" to get the user info, to eventually return an aggregated result of both the user info and the post we found.
Let me clarify it a bit with an example:
posts:
[
{
post: "this is a post about stack overflow",
username: "james_bond",
user_id: "007"
},
{...}
]
users:
[
{
username: "james_bond",
user_id: "007",
bio: "My name's James. James Bond."
nb_posts: "7"
},
{...}
]
I want to search for all the posts which contain "stack overflow", and then display all the users who are talking about it and their info (from the "users" index), it could look something like this:
result: {
username: "james_bond",
user_id: "007",
post: "this is a post about stack overflow",
bio: "My name's James. James Bond"
}
I hope this is clear enough, I'm sorry if this question has already been answered but I honestly didn't find any answer anywhere.
So is it possible to do so with only ES js?
I dont beleive it is possible to do exactly what you are asking as it would be very costly to join across two indexes which are potentially sharded across different nodes (this is not a main use case for elasticsearch). But if you have control of the data within elastic search you could structure the data so that you can acheive a different type of joining.
You can either use:
nested query
Where documents may contain fields of type nested. These fields are used to index arrays of objects, where each object can be queried (with the nested query) as an independent document.
has_child and has_parent queries
A join field relationship can exist between documents within a single index. The has_child query returns parent documents whose child documents match the specified query, while the has_parent query returns child documents whose parent document matches the specified query.
Denormalisation
Alternativly you could store the user denormalised within the post document when you insert the document into the index. This becomes a balancing act between saving time from doing multiple reads every time a post is viwed (fully normalised) and the cost of updating all posts from user 007 everytime his detials change (denormalised). There is a tradeoff here, you dont need to denormalise everything and as you have it you have already denormalised the username from users to posts.
Here is a Question/Answer that gives more detials on the options.
I have two collection one is questions which stores _id, title, options, result, feedback and second is a child in the child I have store question_id, score. And I have filter the _id from questions collection. I don't know how I do this, Is it possible can we set the query for this. so that next time when I find the question from questions collection it sends filtered question. Means Return only that question from questions collection which id not same as the second collection child qustion_id.
This is my first collection where I have store questions, _id title option result feedback
_id:{type:String},
title:{type:String, required:true},
options:{type:Array, required:true},
result:{type:Array, required:true},
feedback:{type:String}
This is my Second collection where I have store attempted question_id and score
quiz:[
{
questionId:{
type:mongoose.Schema.Types.ObjectId,
ref: 'Question',
index: true
},
score:{type:Number},
time:{type:String}
}
]
This is not exactly I just create an example
var query = {}
firstcollection.find($and[{_id:},{secondcollection question_id:}]},function(err, data){
so that filter data means filter _id will store in data.
and I send this data to the frontend
res.send(data);
});
The main problem is conceptual, you are trying to work with mongodb, which is document store in RDBMS style. Under the community pressure Mondo added some minimal join functionality in latest version, but it doesn't make it relational DB.
There is no good way to perform such query. The idea behind document store is simple - you do have collection of documents and you query this collection, and only this collection. All link between collections are "virtual" and only provided by code logic, with no support from DB engine.
So all you can do with mongo is: query first collection for ids (with appropriate projection, to fetch ids only), store answer to some array and then perform second query to other collection using this array.
I am writing an application that stores external data in ArangoDB for further processing inside the application. Let's assume I am talking about Photos in Photosets here.
Due to the nature of used APIs, I need to fetch Photosets befor I can load Photos. In the Photosets API reply, there is a list of Photo IDs that I later use to fetch the Photos. So I created an edge collection called photosInSets and store the edges between Photosets and Photos, although the Photos are not there yet.
Later on, I need to get a list of all needed Photos to load them via the API. All IDs are numeric. At the moment, I use the following AQL query to fetch the IDs of all required Photos:
FOR edge
IN photosInSets
RETURN DISTINCT TO_NUMBER(
SUBSTITUTE(edge._from, "photos/", "")
)
However... this does not look like a nice solution. I'd like to (at least) get rid of the string operation to remove the collection name. What's the nice way to do that?
One way you can find this is with a join on the photosInSets edge collection back to the photos collection.
Try a query that looks like this:
FOR e IN photoInSets
LET item = (FOR v IN photos FILTER e._from == v._id RETURN v._key)
RETURN item
This joins the _from reference in photoInSets with the _id back in the photos collection, then pulls the _key from photos, which won't have the collection name as part of it.
Have a look at a photo item and you'll see there is _id, _key and _rev as system attributes. It's fine to use the _key value if you want a string, it's not necessary to implement your own unique id unless there is a burning reason why you can't expose _key.
With a little manipulation, you could even return an array of objects stating which photo._key is a member of which photoSet, you'll just have to have two LET commands and return both results. One looking at the Photo, one looking at the photoSet.
I'm not official ArangoDB support, but I'm interested if they have another way of doing this.
I have two models Users and News. On the page which is written with Express framework are published news and under the news are comments. Inside News model is subdocument with comments which contains two fields - user (subfields:) { name, objectid } and comment. Because in addition to comment there is user's name, I would like to add some additional informations about it (like number of comments, link to website, ...).
And this is my question: How to get data of user (from Users model) for each comment from subdocument (from News model)?
Add a populate call to your find query to pull in the user details. I'm not quite clear on your schema, but something like:
News.find().populate('comments.userId').exec(...);
This relies on your schema defining userId as an ObjectId ref to Users.
Looking at the example described in Couch DB Joins.
It discusses view collation and how you can have one document for your blog posts, and then each comment is a separate document in CouchDB. So for example, I could have "My Post" and 5 comments associated with "My Post" for a total of 6 documents. In their example, "myslug" is stored both in the post document, and each comment document, so that when I search CouchDB with the key "myslug" it returns all the documents.
Here's the problem/question. Let's say I want to search on the author in the comments and a post that also has a category of "news". How would this work exactly?
So for example:
function(doc) {
if (doc.type == "post") {
emit([doc._id, 0], doc);
} else if (doc.type == "comment") {
emit([doc.post, 1], doc);
}
}
That will load my blog post and comments based on this: ?startkey=["myslug"]
However, I want to do this, grab the comments by author bob, and the post that has the category news. For this example, bob has written three comments to the blog post with the category news. It seems as if CouchDB only allows me search on keys that exist in both documents, and not search on a key in one document, and a key in another that are "joined" together with the map function.
In other words, if post and comments are joined by a slug, how do I search on one field in one document and another field in another document that are joined by the id aka. slug?
In SQL it would be something like this:
SELECT * FROM comments JOIN doc.id ON doc.post WHERE author = bob AND category = news
I've been investigating couchdb for about a week so I'm hardly qualified to answer your question, but I think I've come to the conclusion it can't be done. View results need to be tied to one and only one document so the view can be updated. You are going to have to denormalize, at least if you don't want to do a grunt search. If anyone's come up with a clever way to do this I'd really like to know.
There are several ways that you can approximate a SQL join on CouchDB. I've just asked a similar question here: Why is CouchDB's reduce_limit enabled by default? (Is it better to approximate SQL JOINS in MapReduce views or List views?)
You can use MapReduce (not a good option)
You can use lists (This will iterate over a result set before emitting results, meaning you can 'combine' documents in a number of creative ways)
You can also apparently use 'collation', though I haven't figured this out yet (seems like I always get a count and can only use the feature with Reduce - if I'm on the right track)