findByIdAndUpdate With Multiple Subdocuments - node.js

So I'm working with NodeJS and MongoDB, and I'm making an endpoint that lets clients update their user profiles with several optional data fields. So, one of the update queries can look like this:
{
name: { givenName: 'first' },
about: 'whatever',
auth: { password: 'hashedPW' }
}
The Mongoose API docs state the following info about findByIdAndUpdate: All top level update keys which are not atomic operation names are treated as set operations.
So the top level key, about, works fine to update. However, the nested keys, name and auth are overwritten by the update values, rather than just having the values set.
Now I could go through and manually change each of the fields to be a $set key, but there are a lot of different fields, so to do this would be pretty annoying. Is there an easy way to apply the $set rule to the subdocuments as well? i.e. transform the statement into this, with a Mongoose option or something:
{
$set : { name: { givenName: 'first' } },
$set : { about: 'whatever' },
$set : { auth: { password: 'hashedPW' } }
}

You basically need to tranform your input object into "dot notation" form in order to avoid overwring other possible sub-keys in your update. This is quite simple really:
var obj = {
name: { givenName: 'first' },
about: 'whatever',
auth: { password: 'hashedPW' }
};
var target = {};
function dotNotate(obj,prefix) {
prefix = (typeof(prefix) === 'undefined') ? "" : prefix;
Object.keys(obj).forEach(function(key) {
if ( typeof(obj[key]) === "object" ) {
dotNotate(obj[key],key + ".")
} else {
target[prefix + key] = obj[key];
}
});
}
dotNotate(obj);
Now the target object looks like this:
{
"name.givenName" : "first",
"about" : "whatever",
"auth.password" : "hashedPW"
}
So the update block of your statement is merely written as:
{ "$set": target }
For reference, the dotNotate() function can be a bit more refined and self contained. Also including shorter default assignments as valid input would generally be considered be "truthy". Also the "prefix" should have been pre-pended on each call to make this work at arbitrary depth:
function dotNotate(obj,target,prefix) {
target = target || {},
prefix = prefix || "";
Object.keys(obj).forEach(function(key) {
if ( typeof(obj[key]) === "object" ) {
dotNotate(obj[key],target,prefix + key + ".");
} else {
return target[prefix + key] = obj[key];
}
});
return target;
}
Then you can use either inline:
var update = { "$set": dotNotate(obj) };
Or pass in a defined object like this if you prefer:
var update = { "$set": {} };
dotNotate(obj,update["$set"]);
With the same results.
Also fine for arrays and nested depth:
{
"things" : [
{
"a" : 1,
"b" : 2
},
{
"a" : 3,
"b" : 4
}
],
"bool" : false
}
With output:
{
"things.0.a" : 1,
"things.0.b" : 2,
"things.1.a" : 3,
"things.1.b" : 4,
"bool" : false
}

Related

Why my conditional WHERE inside the OR operator in the Sequelize query is converted to AND?

I'm trying to make a query with Sequelize with a conditional WHERE like explained here (How to perform a search with conditional where parameters using Sequelize).
The relevant part of my code is like this
const Op = Sequelize.Op;
var search = {};
if (typeof req.query.search !== 'undefined'){
search.nome = {[Op.like]: '%' + req.query.search + '%'};
search.username = {[Op.like]: '%' + req.query.search + '%'};
}
model.User.findAll({
where:{
[Op.or]: [
search
]
})
It works, but the generated SQL adds an AND instead of an OR, like this:
SELECT 'id_', 'nome', 'username', 'id' FROM 'User' AS 'User' WHERE (('User'.'nome' LIKE '%test%' AND 'User'.'username' LIKE '%test%'))
Am I doing something wrong that I fail to see?
I've already tried several combinations of this and none works.
There is something wrong in the constructed search filter. [Op.or] should be the spread of search not an array.
Try as below,
model.User.findAll({
where: {
[Op.or]: {
email: {
[Op.like]: 'abcd',
},
username: {
[Op.like]: 'cdf',
},
}
},
logging: console.log,
});
you will get the below,
SELECT "id", "name", "username" FROM "users" AS "User" WHERE "User"."deleted_at" IS NULL AND ("User"."email" LIKE 'abcd' OR "User"."username" LIKE 'cdf');
try to use spread
model.User.findAll({
where: {
[Op.or]: [
{...search}
]
}
})
what about this?
const where = {}
if (typeof req.query.search !== 'undefined'){
where[Op.or] = {
nome : {
[Op.like] : `%${req.query.search}%`
},
username : {
[Op.like] : `%${req.query.search}%`
},
}
}
model.User.findAll({
where
})
Here's some code I'm using:
return Models.job.findAndCountAll({
raw: true,
where: {
isActive: 1,
...((args.statusOfJob > 0) && {
status: args.statusOfJob
})
}
})
In this case, statusOfJob is a numerical value used in a select object, where 0 would show all items.
It's a bit cryptic, but it's also concise and reduces the need for extraneous conditional statements and assignments.

Insert a new document with old information every time in mongoose [duplicate]

In MongoDB, is it possible to update the value of a field using the value from another field? The equivalent SQL would be something like:
UPDATE Person SET Name = FirstName + ' ' + LastName
And the MongoDB pseudo-code would be:
db.person.update( {}, { $set : { name : firstName + ' ' + lastName } );
The best way to do this is in version 4.2+ which allows using the aggregation pipeline in the update document and the updateOne, updateMany, or update(deprecated in most if not all languages drivers) collection methods.
MongoDB 4.2+
Version 4.2 also introduced the $set pipeline stage operator, which is an alias for $addFields. I will use $set here as it maps with what we are trying to achieve.
db.collection.<update method>(
{},
[
{"$set": {"name": { "$concat": ["$firstName", " ", "$lastName"]}}}
]
)
Note that square brackets in the second argument to the method specify an aggregation pipeline instead of a plain update document because using a simple document will not work correctly.
MongoDB 3.4+
In 3.4+, you can use $addFields and the $out aggregation pipeline operators.
db.collection.aggregate(
[
{ "$addFields": {
"name": { "$concat": [ "$firstName", " ", "$lastName" ] }
}},
{ "$out": <output collection name> }
]
)
Note that this does not update your collection but instead replaces the existing collection or creates a new one. Also, for update operations that require "typecasting", you will need client-side processing, and depending on the operation, you may need to use the find() method instead of the .aggreate() method.
MongoDB 3.2 and 3.0
The way we do this is by $projecting our documents and using the $concat string aggregation operator to return the concatenated string.
You then iterate the cursor and use the $set update operator to add the new field to your documents using bulk operations for maximum efficiency.
Aggregation query:
var cursor = db.collection.aggregate([
{ "$project": {
"name": { "$concat": [ "$firstName", " ", "$lastName" ] }
}}
])
MongoDB 3.2 or newer
You need to use the bulkWrite method.
var requests = [];
cursor.forEach(document => {
requests.push( {
'updateOne': {
'filter': { '_id': document._id },
'update': { '$set': { 'name': document.name } }
}
});
if (requests.length === 500) {
//Execute per 500 operations and re-init
db.collection.bulkWrite(requests);
requests = [];
}
});
if(requests.length > 0) {
db.collection.bulkWrite(requests);
}
MongoDB 2.6 and 3.0
From this version, you need to use the now deprecated Bulk API and its associated methods.
var bulk = db.collection.initializeUnorderedBulkOp();
var count = 0;
cursor.snapshot().forEach(function(document) {
bulk.find({ '_id': document._id }).updateOne( {
'$set': { 'name': document.name }
});
count++;
if(count%500 === 0) {
// Excecute per 500 operations and re-init
bulk.execute();
bulk = db.collection.initializeUnorderedBulkOp();
}
})
// clean up queues
if(count > 0) {
bulk.execute();
}
MongoDB 2.4
cursor["result"].forEach(function(document) {
db.collection.update(
{ "_id": document._id },
{ "$set": { "name": document.name } }
);
})
You should iterate through. For your specific case:
db.person.find().snapshot().forEach(
function (elem) {
db.person.update(
{
_id: elem._id
},
{
$set: {
name: elem.firstname + ' ' + elem.lastname
}
}
);
}
);
Apparently there is a way to do this efficiently since MongoDB 3.4, see styvane's answer.
Obsolete answer below
You cannot refer to the document itself in an update (yet). You'll need to iterate through the documents and update each document using a function. See this answer for an example, or this one for server-side eval().
For a database with high activity, you may run into issues where your updates affect actively changing records and for this reason I recommend using snapshot()
db.person.find().snapshot().forEach( function (hombre) {
hombre.name = hombre.firstName + ' ' + hombre.lastName;
db.person.save(hombre);
});
http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/reference/method/cursor.snapshot/
Starting Mongo 4.2, db.collection.update() can accept an aggregation pipeline, finally allowing the update/creation of a field based on another field:
// { firstName: "Hello", lastName: "World" }
db.collection.updateMany(
{},
[{ $set: { name: { $concat: [ "$firstName", " ", "$lastName" ] } } }]
)
// { "firstName" : "Hello", "lastName" : "World", "name" : "Hello World" }
The first part {} is the match query, filtering which documents to update (in our case all documents).
The second part [{ $set: { name: { ... } }] is the update aggregation pipeline (note the squared brackets signifying the use of an aggregation pipeline). $set is a new aggregation operator and an alias of $addFields.
Regarding this answer, the snapshot function is deprecated in version 3.6, according to this update. So, on version 3.6 and above, it is possible to perform the operation this way:
db.person.find().forEach(
function (elem) {
db.person.update(
{
_id: elem._id
},
{
$set: {
name: elem.firstname + ' ' + elem.lastname
}
}
);
}
);
I tried the above solution but I found it unsuitable for large amounts of data. I then discovered the stream feature:
MongoClient.connect("...", function(err, db){
var c = db.collection('yourCollection');
var s = c.find({/* your query */}).stream();
s.on('data', function(doc){
c.update({_id: doc._id}, {$set: {name : doc.firstName + ' ' + doc.lastName}}, function(err, result) { /* result == true? */} }
});
s.on('end', function(){
// stream can end before all your updates do if you have a lot
})
})
update() method takes aggregation pipeline as parameter like
db.collection_name.update(
{
// Query
},
[
// Aggregation pipeline
{ "$set": { "id": "$_id" } }
],
{
// Options
"multi": true // false when a single doc has to be updated
}
)
The field can be set or unset with existing values using the aggregation pipeline.
Note: use $ with field name to specify the field which has to be read.
Here's what we came up with for copying one field to another for ~150_000 records. It took about 6 minutes, but is still significantly less resource intensive than it would have been to instantiate and iterate over the same number of ruby objects.
js_query = %({
$or : [
{
'settings.mobile_notifications' : { $exists : false },
'settings.mobile_admin_notifications' : { $exists : false }
}
]
})
js_for_each = %(function(user) {
if (!user.settings.hasOwnProperty('mobile_notifications')) {
user.settings.mobile_notifications = user.settings.email_notifications;
}
if (!user.settings.hasOwnProperty('mobile_admin_notifications')) {
user.settings.mobile_admin_notifications = user.settings.email_admin_notifications;
}
db.users.save(user);
})
js = "db.users.find(#{js_query}).forEach(#{js_for_each});"
Mongoid::Sessions.default.command('$eval' => js)
With MongoDB version 4.2+, updates are more flexible as it allows the use of aggregation pipeline in its update, updateOne and updateMany. You can now transform your documents using the aggregation operators then update without the need to explicity state the $set command (instead we use $replaceRoot: {newRoot: "$$ROOT"})
Here we use the aggregate query to extract the timestamp from MongoDB's ObjectID "_id" field and update the documents (I am not an expert in SQL but I think SQL does not provide any auto generated ObjectID that has timestamp to it, you would have to automatically create that date)
var collection = "person"
agg_query = [
{
"$addFields" : {
"_last_updated" : {
"$toDate" : "$_id"
}
}
},
{
$replaceRoot: {
newRoot: "$$ROOT"
}
}
]
db.getCollection(collection).updateMany({}, agg_query, {upsert: true})
(I would have posted this as a comment, but couldn't)
For anyone who lands here trying to update one field using another in the document with the c# driver...
I could not figure out how to use any of the UpdateXXX methods and their associated overloads since they take an UpdateDefinition as an argument.
// we want to set Prop1 to Prop2
class Foo { public string Prop1 { get; set; } public string Prop2 { get; set;} }
void Test()
{
var update = new UpdateDefinitionBuilder<Foo>();
update.Set(x => x.Prop1, <new value; no way to get a hold of the object that I can find>)
}
As a workaround, I found that you can use the RunCommand method on an IMongoDatabase (https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/reference/command/update/#dbcmd.update).
var command = new BsonDocument
{
{ "update", "CollectionToUpdate" },
{ "updates", new BsonArray
{
new BsonDocument
{
// Any filter; here the check is if Prop1 does not exist
{ "q", new BsonDocument{ ["Prop1"] = new BsonDocument("$exists", false) }},
// set it to the value of Prop2
{ "u", new BsonArray { new BsonDocument { ["$set"] = new BsonDocument("Prop1", "$Prop2") }}},
{ "multi", true }
}
}
}
};
database.RunCommand<BsonDocument>(command);
MongoDB 4.2+ Golang
result, err := collection.UpdateMany(ctx, bson.M{},
mongo.Pipeline{
bson.D{{"$set",
bson.M{"name": bson.M{"$concat": []string{"$lastName", " ", "$firstName"}}}
}},
)

Conditionally updating items in mongoose query

I have the following code and I'm trying to do two things. First I want to have my query have one condition where it finds the 'originator' value in a doc, but the second par of that is not to update if is also finds 'owner_id' is the same as originator.
The second part of what I'm trying to do is only set/update a field is it is being passed in. Can I use a ternary statement, something like below???
Contacts.update(
{
'originator': profile.owner_id,
'owner_id': !profile.owner_id
},
{
$set: {
(phoneNumber) ? ('shared.phones.$.phone_number': phoneNumber):null,
(emailAddress) ? ('shared.emails.$.email_address': emailAddress):null
}
},
{
'multi': true
},
function(err) {
err === null ? console.log('No errors phone updated for contacts.shared') : console.log('Error: ', err);
}
)
You mean something like this:
var updateBlock = {};
if (phoneNumber)
updateBlock['shared.phones.$.phone_number'] = phoneNumber;
if (emailAddress)
updateBlock['shared.email.$.email_address'] = emailAddress;
Contacts.updateMany(
{
"originator": profile.owner_id
"owner_id": { "$ne": profile.owner_id }
},
{ "$set": updateBlock },
function(err, numAffected) {
// work with callback
}
)
That addresses your two "main" misconceptions here in that the "inequality" in the query condition requires the $ne operator and not the ! JavaScript expression. MongoDB does not use JavaScript expressions here for the query conditions.
The second "main" misconception is the construction of the "update block" with conditional keys. This is by contrast a "JavaScript Object" which you construct separately in order to specify only the keys you wish to effect.
However there is STILL A PROBLEM in that you want to use the positional $ operator. Presuming you actually have "arrays" in the document like this:
{
"originator": "Bill",
"owner_id": "Ted",
"shared": {
"phones": [ "5555 5555", "4444 4444" ],
"email": [ "bill#stalyns.org", "bill#example.com" ]
}
}
Then your "two-fold" new issue is that:
You must specify a query condition that matches the array element "in the query block" in order to obtain the "matched position" at which to update.
You can only return ONE matched array index via use of the positional $ operator and NOT TWO as would be inherent to updating such a document.
For those reasons ( and others ) it is strongly discouraged to have "multiple arrays" within a single document. The far better approach is to use a "singular" array, and use properties to denote what "type" of entry the list item actually contains:
{
"originator": "Bill",
"owner_id": "Ted",
"shared": [
{ "type": "phone", "value": "5555 5555" },
{ "type": "phone", "value": "4444 4444" },
{ "type": "email", "value": "bill#stalyns.org" },
{ "type": "email", "value": "bill#example.com" }
]
}
In this way you can actually address the "matched" element in which to update:
// phoneNumberMatch = "4444 4444";
// phoneNumber = "7777 7777";
// emailAddress = null; // don't want this one
// emailAddressMatch = null; // or this one
// profile = { owner_id: "Bill" };
var query = {
"originator": profile.owner_id,
"owner_id": { "$ne": profile.owner_id },
"shared": {
"$elemMatch": {
"type": (phoneNumber) ? "phone" : "email",
"value": (phoneNumber) ? phoneNumberMatch : emailAddressMatch
}
}
};
var updateBlock = {
"$set": {
"shared.$.value": (phoneNumber) ? phoneNumber : emailAddress
}
};
Contacts.updateMany(query, updateBlock, function(err, numAffected) {
// work with callback
})
In such a case and with a "binary" choice then you "can" use ternary conditions in construction since you are not reliant on "naming keys" within the construction.
If you want "either, or indeed both" supplied values in combination then you need a bit more advanced statement:
// phoneNumberMatch = "5555 5555";
// phoneNumber = "7777 7777";
// emailAddress = "bill#nomail.com";
// emailAddressMatch = "bill#example.com";
// profile = { owner_id: "Bill" };
var query = {
"originator": profile.owner_id,
"owner_id": { "$ne": profile.owner_id },
"$or": []
};
var updateBlock = { "$set": {} };
var arrayFilters = [];
if (phoneNumber) {
// Add $or condition for document match
query.$or.push(
{
"shared.type": "phone",
"shared.value": phoneNumberMatch
}
);
// Add update statement with named identifier
updateBlock.$set['shared.$[phone].value'] = phoneNumber;
// Add filter condition for named identifier
arrayFilters.push({
"phone.type": "phone",
"phone.value": phoneNumberMatch
})
}
if (emailAddress) {
// Add $or condition for document match
query.$or.push(
{
"shared.type": "email",
"shared.value": emailAddressMatch
}
);
// Add update statement with named identifier
updateBlock.$set['shared.$[email].value'] = emailAddress;
// Add filter condition for named identifier
arrayFilters.push({
"email.type": "email",
"email.value": emailAddressMatch
})
}
Contacts.updateMany(query, updateBlock, arrayFilters, function(err, numAffected) {
// work with callback
})
Noting of course here that the positional filtered $[<identifier>] syntax from MongoDB 3.6 and upwards is required in order to effect multiple array elements within a single update statement.
Much the same applies to the "original" structure I first described using "multiple" arrays in the documents instead of named properties on a "singular" array as the above examples deal with:
var query = {
"originator": "Bill",
"owner_id": { "$ne": "Bill" },
"$or": []
};
var updateBlock = { "$set": {} };
var arrayFilters = [];
if (phoneNumber) {
query.$or.push({
"shared.phones": phoneNumberMatch
});
updateBlock.$set['shared.phones.$[phone]'] = phoneNumber;
arrayFilters.push({
"phone": phoneNumberMatch
});
}
if (emailAddress) {
query.$or.push({
"shared.email": emailAddressMatch
});
updateBlock.$set['shared.email.$[email]'] = emailAddress;
arrayFilters.push({
"email": emailAddressMatch
});
}
Contacts.updateMany(query, updateBlock, arrayFilters, function(err, numAffected) {
// work with callback
})
Of course if you don't even have arrays at all ( the question posted lacks any example document ) then positional matches are not even needed in any form, but you do however still "conditionally" construct JavaScript object "keys" via construction code blocks. You cannot "conditionally" specify a "key" in JSON-like notation.
Here is a simple example with switch condition in some variation like this:
const transfоrmFunc = function(val) {
if(val){
// do whatever you want with the value here
return val;
}
return null;
};
AnyModel.updateMany({ fieldId: { $in: ["MATCH1", "MATCH2"] } }, [
{
$set: {
field2: {
$switch: {
branches: [
{
case: { $eq: ["$fieldId", "MATCH1"] },
then: transfоrmFunc("$field3")
},
{
case: { $eq: ["$fieldId", "MATCH2"] },
then: transfоrmFunc("$field4.subfield")
}
]
}
}
}
}
]);
That way you work with both record data and outside data and update conditionally. You can modify query conditions as pleased. Plus it's really fast.

Conflict when updating a document with both $set and $currentDate

I’m using Mongo 3.6.3 and I have a database with a collection and an item with _id equal to 1.
I want to update the item by adding an object and a timestamp inside of that object. However, I get an error. Here’s what I do:
function MyObject() {
this.bar = {
apples: 4,
bananas: 5
};
}
collection.update({
_id: 1
}, {
$set: {
"foo": new MyObject()
},
$currentDate: {
"foo.time": {
$type: 'timestamp'
}
}
}, function (err) {
console.log(err.name, err.message);
});
and I get:
MongoError Updating the path 'foo.time' would create a conflict at 'foo'
Why does that happen?
If I run the $set operation first and then the $currentDate one in another update(), I get the desired result:
{
"_id" : 1,
"foo" : {
"bar" : {
"apples" : 4,
"bananas" : 5
},
"time" : Timestamp(1523459420, 1)
}
}
However, if I try to do them simultaneously like I’ve shown in the code above, I get the error. Why?
You can't have multiple operators ($set and $currentDate) that modify the same path (foo in this case). In your case you could use dot notation though:
collection.update({
_id: 1
}, {
$set: {
"foo.bar.apples": 4,
"foo.bar.bananas": 5
},
$currentDate: {
"foo.time": {
$type: 'timestamp'
}
}
}, function (err) {
console.log(err.name, err.message);
});
or just change MyObject to set this.time = new Date() instead of using $currentDate.

Mongoose, filter by date string 'DDMMYY' [duplicate]

In MongoDB, is it possible to update the value of a field using the value from another field? The equivalent SQL would be something like:
UPDATE Person SET Name = FirstName + ' ' + LastName
And the MongoDB pseudo-code would be:
db.person.update( {}, { $set : { name : firstName + ' ' + lastName } );
The best way to do this is in version 4.2+ which allows using the aggregation pipeline in the update document and the updateOne, updateMany, or update(deprecated in most if not all languages drivers) collection methods.
MongoDB 4.2+
Version 4.2 also introduced the $set pipeline stage operator, which is an alias for $addFields. I will use $set here as it maps with what we are trying to achieve.
db.collection.<update method>(
{},
[
{"$set": {"name": { "$concat": ["$firstName", " ", "$lastName"]}}}
]
)
Note that square brackets in the second argument to the method specify an aggregation pipeline instead of a plain update document because using a simple document will not work correctly.
MongoDB 3.4+
In 3.4+, you can use $addFields and the $out aggregation pipeline operators.
db.collection.aggregate(
[
{ "$addFields": {
"name": { "$concat": [ "$firstName", " ", "$lastName" ] }
}},
{ "$out": <output collection name> }
]
)
Note that this does not update your collection but instead replaces the existing collection or creates a new one. Also, for update operations that require "typecasting", you will need client-side processing, and depending on the operation, you may need to use the find() method instead of the .aggreate() method.
MongoDB 3.2 and 3.0
The way we do this is by $projecting our documents and using the $concat string aggregation operator to return the concatenated string.
You then iterate the cursor and use the $set update operator to add the new field to your documents using bulk operations for maximum efficiency.
Aggregation query:
var cursor = db.collection.aggregate([
{ "$project": {
"name": { "$concat": [ "$firstName", " ", "$lastName" ] }
}}
])
MongoDB 3.2 or newer
You need to use the bulkWrite method.
var requests = [];
cursor.forEach(document => {
requests.push( {
'updateOne': {
'filter': { '_id': document._id },
'update': { '$set': { 'name': document.name } }
}
});
if (requests.length === 500) {
//Execute per 500 operations and re-init
db.collection.bulkWrite(requests);
requests = [];
}
});
if(requests.length > 0) {
db.collection.bulkWrite(requests);
}
MongoDB 2.6 and 3.0
From this version, you need to use the now deprecated Bulk API and its associated methods.
var bulk = db.collection.initializeUnorderedBulkOp();
var count = 0;
cursor.snapshot().forEach(function(document) {
bulk.find({ '_id': document._id }).updateOne( {
'$set': { 'name': document.name }
});
count++;
if(count%500 === 0) {
// Excecute per 500 operations and re-init
bulk.execute();
bulk = db.collection.initializeUnorderedBulkOp();
}
})
// clean up queues
if(count > 0) {
bulk.execute();
}
MongoDB 2.4
cursor["result"].forEach(function(document) {
db.collection.update(
{ "_id": document._id },
{ "$set": { "name": document.name } }
);
})
You should iterate through. For your specific case:
db.person.find().snapshot().forEach(
function (elem) {
db.person.update(
{
_id: elem._id
},
{
$set: {
name: elem.firstname + ' ' + elem.lastname
}
}
);
}
);
Apparently there is a way to do this efficiently since MongoDB 3.4, see styvane's answer.
Obsolete answer below
You cannot refer to the document itself in an update (yet). You'll need to iterate through the documents and update each document using a function. See this answer for an example, or this one for server-side eval().
For a database with high activity, you may run into issues where your updates affect actively changing records and for this reason I recommend using snapshot()
db.person.find().snapshot().forEach( function (hombre) {
hombre.name = hombre.firstName + ' ' + hombre.lastName;
db.person.save(hombre);
});
http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/reference/method/cursor.snapshot/
Starting Mongo 4.2, db.collection.update() can accept an aggregation pipeline, finally allowing the update/creation of a field based on another field:
// { firstName: "Hello", lastName: "World" }
db.collection.updateMany(
{},
[{ $set: { name: { $concat: [ "$firstName", " ", "$lastName" ] } } }]
)
// { "firstName" : "Hello", "lastName" : "World", "name" : "Hello World" }
The first part {} is the match query, filtering which documents to update (in our case all documents).
The second part [{ $set: { name: { ... } }] is the update aggregation pipeline (note the squared brackets signifying the use of an aggregation pipeline). $set is a new aggregation operator and an alias of $addFields.
Regarding this answer, the snapshot function is deprecated in version 3.6, according to this update. So, on version 3.6 and above, it is possible to perform the operation this way:
db.person.find().forEach(
function (elem) {
db.person.update(
{
_id: elem._id
},
{
$set: {
name: elem.firstname + ' ' + elem.lastname
}
}
);
}
);
I tried the above solution but I found it unsuitable for large amounts of data. I then discovered the stream feature:
MongoClient.connect("...", function(err, db){
var c = db.collection('yourCollection');
var s = c.find({/* your query */}).stream();
s.on('data', function(doc){
c.update({_id: doc._id}, {$set: {name : doc.firstName + ' ' + doc.lastName}}, function(err, result) { /* result == true? */} }
});
s.on('end', function(){
// stream can end before all your updates do if you have a lot
})
})
update() method takes aggregation pipeline as parameter like
db.collection_name.update(
{
// Query
},
[
// Aggregation pipeline
{ "$set": { "id": "$_id" } }
],
{
// Options
"multi": true // false when a single doc has to be updated
}
)
The field can be set or unset with existing values using the aggregation pipeline.
Note: use $ with field name to specify the field which has to be read.
Here's what we came up with for copying one field to another for ~150_000 records. It took about 6 minutes, but is still significantly less resource intensive than it would have been to instantiate and iterate over the same number of ruby objects.
js_query = %({
$or : [
{
'settings.mobile_notifications' : { $exists : false },
'settings.mobile_admin_notifications' : { $exists : false }
}
]
})
js_for_each = %(function(user) {
if (!user.settings.hasOwnProperty('mobile_notifications')) {
user.settings.mobile_notifications = user.settings.email_notifications;
}
if (!user.settings.hasOwnProperty('mobile_admin_notifications')) {
user.settings.mobile_admin_notifications = user.settings.email_admin_notifications;
}
db.users.save(user);
})
js = "db.users.find(#{js_query}).forEach(#{js_for_each});"
Mongoid::Sessions.default.command('$eval' => js)
With MongoDB version 4.2+, updates are more flexible as it allows the use of aggregation pipeline in its update, updateOne and updateMany. You can now transform your documents using the aggregation operators then update without the need to explicity state the $set command (instead we use $replaceRoot: {newRoot: "$$ROOT"})
Here we use the aggregate query to extract the timestamp from MongoDB's ObjectID "_id" field and update the documents (I am not an expert in SQL but I think SQL does not provide any auto generated ObjectID that has timestamp to it, you would have to automatically create that date)
var collection = "person"
agg_query = [
{
"$addFields" : {
"_last_updated" : {
"$toDate" : "$_id"
}
}
},
{
$replaceRoot: {
newRoot: "$$ROOT"
}
}
]
db.getCollection(collection).updateMany({}, agg_query, {upsert: true})
(I would have posted this as a comment, but couldn't)
For anyone who lands here trying to update one field using another in the document with the c# driver...
I could not figure out how to use any of the UpdateXXX methods and their associated overloads since they take an UpdateDefinition as an argument.
// we want to set Prop1 to Prop2
class Foo { public string Prop1 { get; set; } public string Prop2 { get; set;} }
void Test()
{
var update = new UpdateDefinitionBuilder<Foo>();
update.Set(x => x.Prop1, <new value; no way to get a hold of the object that I can find>)
}
As a workaround, I found that you can use the RunCommand method on an IMongoDatabase (https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/reference/command/update/#dbcmd.update).
var command = new BsonDocument
{
{ "update", "CollectionToUpdate" },
{ "updates", new BsonArray
{
new BsonDocument
{
// Any filter; here the check is if Prop1 does not exist
{ "q", new BsonDocument{ ["Prop1"] = new BsonDocument("$exists", false) }},
// set it to the value of Prop2
{ "u", new BsonArray { new BsonDocument { ["$set"] = new BsonDocument("Prop1", "$Prop2") }}},
{ "multi", true }
}
}
}
};
database.RunCommand<BsonDocument>(command);
MongoDB 4.2+ Golang
result, err := collection.UpdateMany(ctx, bson.M{},
mongo.Pipeline{
bson.D{{"$set",
bson.M{"name": bson.M{"$concat": []string{"$lastName", " ", "$firstName"}}}
}},
)

Resources