For brevity, I am going to use some simple examples to illustrate my problem. So I currently have two classes:
Class Person and Class Pet
class Person:Codable {
var name:String
var pets:[Pet]?
}
class Pet:Codable {
var name:String
weak var owner:Person?
}
How would I add the owner reference of "Pet" if I am retrieving the data from a json?
JSON would be probably like this:
[
{
"name":"John",
"pets":[
{
"name":"Meow",
"owner":"John"
},
{
"name":"Woof",
"owner":"John"
}
]
}
]
Your JSON is an array of dictionaries, each dictionary representing a person. Each person dictionary itself has an array (associated with the key pets) and each entry in that array is a dictionary representing a pet owned by the person. Your question is how you set your pet -> person weak link, you don't say what you've tried. Here is some sample pseudo-code outlining how you would process this JSON:
parsedJSON = ... // parse the JSON using favourite method, returning an array of dictionaries
allPeople = new Array // place to store all the people
for each personDictionary in parsedJSON // iterate over every person dictionary
nextPerson = new Person // create a new Person
nextPerson.name = personDictionary["name"] // set the name
nextPerson.pets = new Array // create an array for the pets
for each petDictionary in personDictionary["pets"] // iterate over the pets
nextPet = new Pet // create a new Pet
nextPet.name = petDictionary["name"] // set its name
nextPet.owner = nextPerson // set its owner <- answer to your question
nextPerson.pets.add(nextPet) // add pet to person
end for
allPeople.add(nextPerson) // add completed person to allPeople
end for
// at this point allPeople has all the people, and each person
// has all their pets, and each pet has an owner
Now just code that up in Swift 4.
I'm open to changing the json structure as well
The above pseudo-code ignores the owner field for each pet, the pets are nested inside a person dictionary representing the owner so the owner field in a pet is just repeating that information and can be dropped form the JSON.
In your internal data structures having the (weak) back link to the owner might be useful so you can keep that, as the above pseudo-code does.
If you have trouble writing the above algorithm then ask a new question showing the code you've written, describe where your issue is, and someone will undoubtedly help you. Putting a reference to this question in your new one would also be helpful so people and read the history of your question and what you've already had answered.
HTH
Related
I have JSON objects imported from an external system, some of which are duplicates in an ID value.
Foe example:
{
"ID": "1",
"name": "Bob",
"ink": "100"
},
{
"ID":"2",
"Name": "George",
"ink": "100"
},
{
"ID":"1",
"name": "Bob",
"ink":"200"
}
I am manipulating the information for each object, then push them into a new JSON array:
var array = {};
array.users = [];
for (let user of users) {
function (user) => {
...
array.users.push(user);
}
}
I need to remove all duplicates save the one with the highest value in the ink key.
I found solutions to do this for the array AFTER it is constructed, but that means I use system resources for nothing - no reason to manipulate users that will be removed anyway.
I am looking for a way to check for each new user if a user with that ID:value pair already exists in the array.users[] array, if it does, compare the values of the ink key, if it is higher - remove the existing from the array, then I can continue with my manipulation code and push the new user into the array.
Any ideas of what would be the most elegant/efficient/shortest way to accomplish this?
I am not really sure if I fully understood your question. If I understand correctly you don't want to pass through the entire array after it is constructed and check for duplicates?
"If in doubt throw a hash map at the problem". Use a map instead of a plain array. The map key stores the ID. And save your fields as the value. If a key already exists then you can just check which value is higher.
Code example should somewhat look like this:
let userMap = new Map()
for (let user in users) {
if (userMap.has(user["ID"]) //Look which ink is bigger
else //Store new entry
}
EDIT: My solution does require an extra step though and is not directly done in the original array. However, I still think that maps are probably one of the most efficient ways to handle this...
var array = {};
array.users = users.filter((user)=>{
for (let userSecond of users) {
if(userSecond.id === user.id && +userSecond.ink > +user.ink){
return false;
}
}
return true;
});
Not the cleanest solution perhaps but it should do the job. Basically you filter through users. Within the filter you go through every user again to check if any of them has the same id and more ink, if so the current user should be discarded by returning false. If no user is found with same id and more ink the current user will stay in the array.
Something strange is going on or something idiotic I did but I got the following problem.
I got aenter code here web app where I have an online menu for a restaurant.
The structure of the products is as follows.
Facility->Category->Item->Name
So all item models have saved the name of the category they belong to as a string.
But sometimes you want to change the name of the category. What I wanted to do was find all the items in this category and change the name of the assigned category to the new one. Everything looked great until I saw that it took two times to run the controller that changed the name of the category and on the items to fully save the new name to the items.
The category changed the name but the items updated to the new name on the second run. Weird right?
So, what is that you can see that I don't and I implemented the silliest way of bugfix in the history of bugfixes.
Here is the controller - route.
module.exports.updateCtg = async(req,res)=>{
const {id} = req.params;
for(i=0;i<2; i++){
category = await CategoryModel.findByIdAndUpdate(id,{...req.body.category});
await category.save();
items = await ItemModel.find({});
for(item of items){
if(item.facility === category.facility){
item.category = category.name;
await single.save();
}
}
}
res.render('dashboard/ctgview', {category._id});
}
The findByIdAndUpdate function returns the found document, i.e. the document before any updates are applied.
This means that on the first run through category is set to the original document. Since the following loop uses category.name, it is setting the category of each item to the unmodified name.
The second iteration find the modified document, and the nested loop uses the new value in category.name.
To get this in a single pass, use
item.category = req.category.name;
or if you aren't certain it will contain a new name, use
item.category = req.category.name || category.name;
Or perhaps instead of a loop, use updateMany
if (req.category.name) {
ItemModel.updateMany(
{"item.facility": category.facility},
{"item.category": req.category.name}
)
}
I am making a call to an API for a commercial product using Apps Script. Unfortunately, the resulting object has several key-value pairs that contain the id from a linked table.
I can easily get the standard values and have written code to find the related name value and add it to the object. I would prefer to add the name in the same location as the original id. But, when I add a new key, it is added to the end of the object.
I want the name in the same location as id so when I insert it into a sheet, the columns will still be in order.
This is my object:
var json = {id: 4730183,name: "A A", customer_source_id:123, company: "NE Company"};
This is my desired object after replacing the id with the name:
var json = {id: 4730183,name: "A A", source:"CRM", company: "NE Company"};
Basically, I want to find customer_source_id in the object and replace it with source.
I can't use indexOf and splice because the object is not an array.
What is the best way to do this? Do I have to convert it to an array first and then back again?
A quick answer would be:
var obj = {id: 4730183,name: "A A", customer_source_id:123, company: "NE Company"};
var json = JSON.stringify(obj);
json = json.replace("customer_source_id","source")
The better answer is:
#Waqar Ahmed is correct. JavaScript objects are unordered. In your example "var json" is an object not JSON. You can make it JSON with JSON.stringify(json). But once the JSON is parsed into an object it again becomes unordered. You should not use it to store ordered data.
I am not sure if it is efficient, but you can iterate through the keys and build a new json object like this:
var newjson = {};
for(var key in json){
if(key === 'customer_source_id'){
newjson.source = [NEW VALUE TO DISPLAY];
}else{
newjson[key] = json[key];
}
}
json = newjson;
But, like #Waqar and #Spencer said, the object is not used for ordered data.
You can do his only in java script array. Not in JSON. JSON is meant to be addressed by keys, not by index.Change your json to
var json ={id: 4730183,name: "A A", customer_source_id:null, items : [] company: "ESI"};
Now you can insert items using push method of array.
json.items.push('My Item');
Is it appropriate that my collections have a key call session so that I can identify from whom this data belongs to? For example, I have few sets of data that store books. How to identify in nosql DB(MongoDB) that a set of data belongs to which user? I know in mysql we simply design the table using Foreign Key, but how can I do it in nosql?
What I can think of is I will have these data :
{
bookId:1,
bookName: "soemthing",
userId:1
}
{
another_collection_key:1,
another_value: "soemthing",
userId:1
}
where every set of data will have userId, correct?
The best way is to create a user collection and a book collection. In each book collection add a list of type 'user'. Sample collections given below -
User{id,name}
Book{id,name,list<user>}
This way each book can store all the users who have that book.
The other way is to create 3 collections - books, users and a link collection for linking book and user.
Sample collections given below -
User { id,name }
Books { id,name }
Lnk_User_Book { User_Id,Book_Id }.
I'm pretty new to couchDB and even after reading (latest archive as now deleted) http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/How_to_store_hierarchical_data (via ‘Store the full path to each node as an attribute in that node's document’) it's still not clicking just yet.
Instead of using the full path pattern as described in the wiki I'm hoping to keep track of children as an array of UUIDs and the parent as a single UUID. I'm leaning towards this pattern so I can maintain the order of children by their positions in the children array.
Here are some sample documents in couch, buckets can contain buckets and items, items can only contain other items. (UUIDs abbreviated for clarity):
{_id: 3944
name: "top level bucket with two items"
type: "bucket",
parent: null
children: [8989, 4839]
}
{_id: 8989
name: "second level item with no sub items"
type: "item"
parent: 3944
}
{
_id: 4839
name: "second level bucket with one item"
type: "bucket",
parent: 3944
children: [5694]
}
{
_id: 5694
name: "third level item (has one sub item)"
type: "item",
parent: 4839,
children: [5390]
}
{
_id: 5390
name: "fourth level item"
type: "item"
parent: 5694
}
Is it possible to look up a document by an embedded document id within a map function?
function(doc) {
if(doc.type == "bucket" || doc.type == "item")
emit(doc, null); // still working on my key value output structure
if(doc.children) {
for(var i in doc.children) {
// can i look up a document here using ids from the children array?
doc.children[i]; // psuedo code
emit(); // the retrieved document would be emitted here
}
}
}
}
In an ideal world final JSON output would look something like.
{"_id":3944,
"name":"top level bucket with two items",
"type":"bucket",
"parent":"",
"children":[
{"_id":8989, "name":"second level item with no sub items", "type":"item", "parent":3944},
{"_id": 4839, "name":"second level bucket with one item", "type":"bucket", "parent":3944, "children":[
{"_id":5694", "name":"third level item (has one sub item)", "type":"item", "parent": 4839, "children":[
{"_id":5390, "name":"fourth level item", "type":"item", "parent":5694}
]}
]}
]
}
You can find a general discussion on the CouchDB wiki.
I have no time to test it right now, however your map function should look something like:
function(doc) {
if (doc.type === "bucket" || doc.type === "item")
emit([ doc._id, -1 ], 1);
if (doc.children) {
for (var i = 0, child_id; child_id = doc.children[i]; ++i) {
emit([ doc._id, i ], { _id: child_id });
}
}
}
}
You should query it with include_docs=true to get the documents, as explained in the CouchDB documentation: if your map function emits an object value which has {'_id': XXX} and you query view with include_docs=true parameter, then CouchDB will fetch the document with id XXX rather than the document which was processed to emit the key/value pair.
Add startkey=["3944"]&endkey["3944",{}] to get only the document with id "3944" with its children.
EDIT: have a look at this question for more details.
Can you output a tree structure from a view? No. CouchDB view queries return a list of values, there is no way to have them output anything other than a list. So, you have to deal with your map returning the list of all descendants of a given bucket.
You can, however, plug a _list post-processing function after the view itself, to turn that list back into a nested structure. This is possible if your values know the _id of their parent — the algorithm is fairly straightforward, just ask another question if it gives you trouble.
Can you grab a document by its id in the map function? No. There's no way to grab a document by its identifier from within CouchDB. The request must come from the application, either in the form of a standard GET on the document identifier, or by adding include_docs=true to a view request.
The technical reason for this is pretty simple: CouchDB only runs the map function when the document changes. If document A was allowed to fetch document B, then the emitted data would become invalid when B changes.
Can you output all descendants without storing the list of parents of every node? No. CouchDB map functions emit a set of key-value-id pairs for every document in the database, so the correspondence between the key and the id must be determined based on a single document.
If you have a four-level tree structure A -> B -> C -> D but only let a node know about its parent and children, then none of the nodes above know that D is a descendant of A, so you will not be able to emit the id of D with a key based on A and thus it will not be visible in the output.
So, you have three choices:
Grab only three levels (this is possible because B knows that C is a descendant of A), and grab additional levels by running the query again.
Somehow store the list of descendants of every node within the node (this is costly).
Store the list of parents of every node within the node.