Dynamodb query not working - node.js

I want perform query on multiple columns in dynamodb
I want to search on 4 fields
rule0 which is unique hence hash key,
which_rule is Global Index,
rule1 is Global Index,
rule2 is Global Index,
I searching for rule0 first then rule1 then rule2
I am using following function to match rule1 cause match not found with rule0
function dynamoQueryRule1(rule0, rule1, funcQ) {
which_rule = "rule1";
var q = {
"KeyConditions": {
"rule0": {
"ComparisonOperator": "EQ",
"AttributeValueList": [{
"S": rule0
}]
}
},
"TableName": "tbl_scripts" + table_prefix,
"AttributesToGet": ['id'],
"ConditionalOperator": "AND",
"QueryFilter": {
"which_rule": {
"ComparisonOperator": "EQ",
"AttributeValueList": [{
"S": which_rule
}]
},
"rule1": {
"ComparisonOperator": "EQ",
"AttributeValueList": [{
"S": rule1
}]
}
}
};
var params = {
TableName: this.options.tbl_name
};
But this function is never gets results for rule1. Even I have already created those rules in dymamo table.
To check dynamo data, I have checked with scan its working fine but scan having 1mb limitation and not perfect usecase for my problem.
Please help me to find bug in query format.

Check if your response object has [LastEvaluatedKey] != null.
If the [LastEvaluatedKey] is set then it means you did not query the entire dataset yet (again because of the 1M limit). So you would need to call query again setting the ExclusiveStartKey in the query = the LastEvaluatedKey from the previous response. (appending all the results together)
This similar question shows the syntax for how to do this in node.js:
Recursive Fetch All Items In DynamoDB Query using Node JS

Related

Nodejs Elasticsearch query default behaviour

On a daily basis, I'm pushing data (time_series) to Elasticsearch. I created an index pattern, and my index have the name: myindex_* , where * is today date (an index pattern has been setup). Thus after a week, I have: myindex_2022-06-20, myindex_2022-06-21... myindex_2022-06-27.
Let's assume my index is indexing products' prices. Thus inside each myindex_*, I have got:
myindex_2022-06-26 is including many products prices like this:
{
"reference_code": "123456789",
"price": 10.00
},
...
myindex_2022-06-27:
{
"reference_code": "123456789",
"price": 12.00
},
I'm using this query to get the reference code and the corresponding prices. And it works great.
const data = await elasticClient.search({
index: myindex_2022-06-27,
body: {
query: {
match: {
"reference_code": "123456789"
}
}
}
});
But, I would like to have a query that if in the index of the date 2022-06-27, there is no data, then it checks, in the previous index 2022-06-26, and so on (until e.g. 10x).
Not sure, but it seems it's doing this when I replace myindex_2022-06-27 by myindex_* (not sure it's the default behaviour).
The issue is that when I'm using this way, I got prices from other index but it seems to use the oldest one. I would like to get the newest one instead, thus the opposite way.
How should I proceed?
If you query with index wildcard, it should return a list of documents, where every document will include some meta fields as _index and _id.
You can sort by _index, to make elastic search return the latest document at position [0] in your list.
const data = await elasticClient.search({
index: myindex_2022-*,
body: {
query: {
match: {
"reference_code": "123456789"
}
}
sort : { "_index" : "desc" },
}
});

CouchDB Count Reduce with timestamp filtering

Let's say I have documents like so:
{
_id: "a98798978s978dd98d",
type: "signature",
uid: "u12345",
category: "cat_1",
timestamp: UNIX_TIMESTAMP
}
My goal is to be able to count all signature's created by a certain uid but being able to filter by timestamp
Thanks to Alexis, I've gotten to this far with a reduce _count function:
function (doc) {
if (doc.type === "signature") {
emit([doc.uid, doc.timestamp], 1);
}
}
With the following queries:
start_key=[null,lowerTimestamp]
end_key=[{},higherTimestamp]
reduce=true
group_level=1
Response:
{
"rows": [
{
"key": [ "u11111" ],
"value": 3
},
{
"key": [ "u12345" ],
"value": 26
}
]
}
It counts the uid correctly but the filter doesn't work properly. At first I thought it might be a CouchDB 2.2 bug, but I tried on Cloudant and I got the same response.
Does anyone have any ideas on how I could get this to work with being ale to filter timestamps?
When using compound keys in MapReduce (i.e. the key is an array of things), you cannot query a range of keys with a "leading" array element missing. i.e. you can query a range of uuids and get the results ordered by timestamp, but your use-case is the other way round - you want to query uuids by time.
I'd be tempted to put time first in the array, but unix timestamps are not so good for grouping ;). I don't known the ins and outs of your application but if you were to index a date instead of a timestamp like so:
function (doc) {
if (doc.type === "signature") {
var date = new Date(doc.timestamp)
var datestr = date.toISOString().split('T')[0]
emit([datestr, doc.uuid], 1);
}
}
This would allow you to query a range of dates (to the resolution of a whole day):
?startkey=["2018-01-01"]&endkey=["2018-02-01"]&group_level=2
albeit with your uuids grouped by day.

DynamoDB Scan with FilterExpression in nodejs

I'm trying to retrieve all items from a DynamoDB table that match a FilterExpression, and although all of the items are scanned and half do match, the expected items aren't returned.
I have the following in an AWS Lambda function running on Node.js 6.10:
var AWS = require("aws-sdk"),
documentClient = new AWS.DynamoDB.DocumentClient();
function fetchQuotes(category) {
let params = {
"TableName": "quotient-quotes",
"FilterExpression": "category = :cat",
"ExpressionAttributeValues": {":cat": {"S": category}}
};
console.log(`params=${JSON.stringify(params)}`);
documentClient.scan(params, function(err, data) {
if (err) {
console.error(JSON.stringify(err));
} else {
console.log(JSON.stringify(data));
}
});
}
There are 10 items in the table, one of which is:
{
"category": "ChuckNorris",
"quote": "Chuck Norris does not sleep. He waits.",
"uuid": "844a0af7-71e9-41b0-9ca7-d090bb71fdb8"
}
When testing with category "ChuckNorris", the log shows:
params={"TableName":"quotient-quotes","FilterExpression":"category = :cat","ExpressionAttributeValues":{":cat":{"S":"ChuckNorris"}}}
{"Items":[],"Count":0,"ScannedCount":10}
The scan call returns all 10 items when I only specify TableName:
params={"TableName":"quotient-quotes"}
{"Items":[<snip>,{"category":"ChuckNorris","uuid":"844a0af7-71e9-41b0-9ca7-d090bb71fdb8","CamelCase":"thevalue","quote":"Chuck Norris does not sleep. He waits."},<snip>],"Count":10,"ScannedCount":10}
You do not need to specify the type ("S") in your ExpressionAttributeValues because you are using the DynamoDB DocumentClient. Per the documentation:
The document client simplifies working with items in Amazon DynamoDB by abstracting away the notion of attribute values. This abstraction annotates native JavaScript types supplied as input parameters, as well as converts annotated response data to native JavaScript types.
It's only when you're using the raw DynamoDB object via new AWS.DynamoDB() that you need to specify the attribute types (i.e., the simple objects keyed on "S", "N", and so on).
With DocumentClient, you should be able to use params like this:
const params = {
TableName: 'quotient-quotes',
FilterExpression: '#cat = :cat',
ExpressionAttributeNames: {
'#cat': 'category',
},
ExpressionAttributeValues: {
':cat': category,
},
};
Note that I also moved the field name into an ExpressionAttributeNames value just for consistency and safety. It's a good practice because certain field names may break your requests if you do not.
I was looking for a solution that combined KeyConditionExpression with FilterExpression and eventually I worked this out.
Where aws is the uuid. Id is an assigned unique number preceded with the text 'form' so I can tell I have form data, optinSite is so I can find enquiries from a particular site. Other data is stored, this is all I need to get the packet.
Maybe this can be of help to you:
let optinSite = 'https://theDomainIWantedTFilterFor.com/';
let aws = 'eu-west-4:EXAMPLE-aaa1-4bd8-9ean-1768882l1f90';
let item = {
TableName: 'Table',
KeyConditionExpression: "aws = :Aw and begins_with(Id, :form)",
FilterExpression: "optinSite = :Os",
ExpressionAttributeValues: {
":Aw" : { S: aws },
":form" : { S: 'form' },
":Os" : { S: optinSite }
}
};

how to remove object in array by index mongodb / mongoose [duplicate]

In the following example, assume the document is in the db.people collection.
How to remove the 3rd element of the interests array by it's index?
{
"_id" : ObjectId("4d1cb5de451600000000497a"),
"name" : "dannie",
"interests" : [
"guitar",
"programming",
"gadgets",
"reading"
]
}
This is my current solution:
var interests = db.people.findOne({"name":"dannie"}).interests;
interests.splice(2,1)
db.people.update({"name":"dannie"}, {"$set" : {"interests" : interests}});
Is there a more direct way?
There is no straight way of pulling/removing by array index. In fact, this is an open issue http://jira.mongodb.org/browse/SERVER-1014 , you may vote for it.
The workaround is using $unset and then $pull:
db.lists.update({}, {$unset : {"interests.3" : 1 }})
db.lists.update({}, {$pull : {"interests" : null}})
Update: as mentioned in some of the comments this approach is not atomic and can cause some race conditions if other clients read and/or write between the two operations. If we need the operation to be atomic, we could:
Read the document from the database
Update the document and remove the item in the array
Replace the document in the database. To ensure the document has not changed since we read it, we can use the update if current pattern described in the mongo docs
You can use $pull modifier of update operation for removing a particular element in an array. In case you provided a query will look like this:
db.people.update({"name":"dannie"}, {'$pull': {"interests": "guitar"}})
Also, you may consider using $pullAll for removing all occurrences. More about this on the official documentation page - http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Updating#Updating-%24pull
This doesn't use index as a criteria for removing an element, but still might help in cases similar to yours. IMO, using indexes for addressing elements inside an array is not very reliable since mongodb isn't consistent on an elements order as fas as I know.
in Mongodb 4.2 you can do this:
db.example.update({}, [
{$set: {field: {
$concatArrays: [
{$slice: ["$field", P]},
{$slice: ["$field", {$add: [1, P]}, {$size: "$field"}]}
]
}}}
]);
P is the index of element you want to remove from array.
If you want to remove from P till end:
db.example.update({}, [
{ $set: { field: { $slice: ["$field", 1] } } },
]);
Starting in Mongo 4.4, the $function aggregation operator allows applying a custom javascript function to implement behaviour not supported by the MongoDB Query Language.
For instance, in order to update an array by removing an element at a given index:
// { "name": "dannie", "interests": ["guitar", "programming", "gadgets", "reading"] }
db.collection.update(
{ "name": "dannie" },
[{ $set:
{ "interests":
{ $function: {
body: function(interests) { interests.splice(2, 1); return interests; },
args: ["$interests"],
lang: "js"
}}
}
}]
)
// { "name": "dannie", "interests": ["guitar", "programming", "reading"] }
$function takes 3 parameters:
body, which is the function to apply, whose parameter is the array to modify. The function here simply consists in using splice to remove 1 element at index 2.
args, which contains the fields from the record that the body function takes as parameter. In our case "$interests".
lang, which is the language in which the body function is written. Only js is currently available.
Rather than using the unset (as in the accepted answer), I solve this by setting the field to a unique value (i.e. not NULL) and then immediately pulling that value. A little safer from an asynch perspective. Here is the code:
var update = {};
var key = "ToBePulled_"+ new Date().toString();
update['feedback.'+index] = key;
Venues.update(venueId, {$set: update});
return Venues.update(venueId, {$pull: {feedback: key}});
Hopefully mongo will address this, perhaps by extending the $position modifier to support $pull as well as $push.
I would recommend using a GUID (I tend to use ObjectID) field, or an auto-incrementing field for each sub-document in the array.
With this GUID it is easy to issue a $pull and be sure that the correct one will be pulled. Same goes for other array operations.
For people who are searching an answer using mongoose with nodejs. This is how I do it.
exports.deletePregunta = function (req, res) {
let codTest = req.params.tCodigo;
let indexPregunta = req.body.pregunta; // the index that come from frontend
let inPregunta = `tPreguntas.0.pregunta.${indexPregunta}`; // my field in my db
let inOpciones = `tPreguntas.0.opciones.${indexPregunta}`; // my other field in my db
let inTipo = `tPreguntas.0.tipo.${indexPregunta}`; // my other field in my db
Test.findOneAndUpdate({ tCodigo: codTest },
{
'$unset': {
[inPregunta]: 1, // put the field with []
[inOpciones]: 1,
[inTipo]: 1
}
}).then(()=>{
Test.findOneAndUpdate({ tCodigo: codTest }, {
'$pull': {
'tPreguntas.0.pregunta': null,
'tPreguntas.0.opciones': null,
'tPreguntas.0.tipo': null
}
}).then(testModificado => {
if (!testModificado) {
res.status(404).send({ accion: 'deletePregunta', message: 'No se ha podido borrar esa pregunta ' });
} else {
res.status(200).send({ accion: 'deletePregunta', message: 'Pregunta borrada correctamente' });
}
})}).catch(err => { res.status(500).send({ accion: 'deletePregunta', message: 'error en la base de datos ' + err }); });
}
I can rewrite this answer if it dont understand very well, but I think is okay.
Hope this help you, I lost a lot of time facing this issue.
It is little bit late but some may find it useful who are using robo3t-
db.getCollection('people').update(
{"name":"dannie"},
{ $pull:
{
interests: "guitar" // you can change value to
}
},
{ multi: true }
);
If you have values something like -
property: [
{
"key" : "key1",
"value" : "value 1"
},
{
"key" : "key2",
"value" : "value 2"
},
{
"key" : "key3",
"value" : "value 3"
}
]
and you want to delete a record where the key is key3 then you can use something -
db.getCollection('people').update(
{"name":"dannie"},
{ $pull:
{
property: { key: "key3"} // you can change value to
}
},
{ multi: true }
);
The same goes for the nested property.
this can be done using $pop operator,
db.getCollection('collection_name').updateOne( {}, {$pop: {"path_to_array_object":1}})

A find() statement with possible null parameters

I'm trying to figure out how Mongoose and MongoDB works... I'm really new to them, and I can't seem to figure how to return values based on a find statement, where some of the given parameters in the query possible are null - is there an attribute I can set for this or something?
To explain it further, I have a web page that has different input fields that are used to search for a company, however they're not all mandatory.
var Company = mongoose.model('Company');
Company.find({companyName: req.query.companyName, position: req.query.position,
areaOfExpertise: req.query.areaOfExpertise, zip: req.query.zip,
country: req.query.country}, function(err, docs) {
res.json(docs);
});
By filling out all the input fields on the webpage I get a result back, but only that specific one which matches. Let's say I only fill out country, it returns nothing because the rest are empty, but I wish to return all rows which are e.g. in Germany. I hope I expressed myself clearly enough.
You need to wrap the queries with the $or logic operator, for example
var Company = mongoose.model('Company');
Company.find(
{
"$or": [
{ "companyName": req.query.companyName },
{ "position": req.query.position },
{ "areaOfExpertise": req.query.areaOfExpertise },
{ "zip": req.query.zip },
{ "country": req.query.country }
]
}, function(err, docs) {
res.json(docs);
}
);
Another approach would be to construct a query that checks for empty parameters, if they are not null then include it as part of the query. For example, you can just use the req.query object as your query assuming the keys are the same as your document's field, as in the following:
/*
the req.query object will only have two parameters/keys e.g.
req.query = {
position: "Developer",
country: "France"
}
*/
var Company = mongoose.model('Company');
Company.find(req.query, function(err, docs) {
if (err) throw err;
res.json(docs);
});
In the above, the req.query object acts as the query and has an implicit logical AND operation since MongoDB provides an implicit AND operation when specifying a comma separated list of expressions. Using an explicit AND with the $and operator is necessary when the same field or operator has to be specified in multiple expressions.
If you are after a query that satisfies both logical AND and OR i.e. return all documents that match the conditions of both clauses for example given a query for position AND country OR any other fields then you may tweak the query to:
var Company = mongoose.model('Company');
Company.find(
{
"$or": [
{ "companyName": req.query.companyName },
{
"position": req.query.position,
"country": req.query.country
},
{ "areaOfExpertise": req.query.areaOfExpertise },
{ "zip": req.query.zip }
]
}, function(err, docs) {
res.json(docs);
}
);
but then again this could be subject to what query parameters need to be joined as mandatory etc.
I simply ended up deleting the parameters in the query in case they were empty. It seems all the text fields in the submit are submitted as "" (empty). Since there are no such values in the database, it would return nothing. So simple it never crossed my mind...
Example:
if (req.query.companyName == "") {
delete req.query.companyName;
}

Resources