i am using Strapi for a prototype and i am meeting the following issue. I have created a new content type "Checklist" and i added in it a relation property 1 to many with the User model provided by the users-permissions plugin.
Then i wanted to add some custom logic on the lifecycle call back, in beforeSave and in beforeUpdate from which i would like to access the user assigned to the Checklist.
The code looks like that:
{
var self = module.exports = {
// Before saving a value.
// Fired before an `insert` or `update` query.
generateLabel : (model) => {
var label = "";
var day = _moment(model.date,_moment.ISO_8601).year();
var month = _moment(model.date,_moment.ISO_8601).day();
var year = _moment(model.date,_moment.ISO_8601).month();
console.log(model);
if (model.user) {
label = `${model.user}-${year}-${month}-${day}`;
}else{
label = `unassigned-${year}-${month}-${day}`;
}
return label;
I call the method generateLabel from the callback. It works, but my model.user always returned undefined. It is a 1-n property. I can access model.date property (one of the field i have created) without any issue, so i guess the pbs is related to something i have to do to populate the user relation, but i am not sure on how to proceed.
When i log the model object, the console display what i guess is a complete mongoose object but i am not sure where to go from there as if i try to access the property that i see in the console, i will always reach an undefined.
Thanks in advance for your time, i use the following
strapi: 3.0.0-alpha.13.0.1
nodejs: v9.10.1
mongodb: 3.6.3
macos high sierra
Also running into the similar / same issue, I think this has to do with the user permissions plugin, and having to use that to access the User model. Or I thought about trying to find the User that’s associated with the id of the newly created record. I’m trying to use AfterCreate. Anyone that could shed some light on this would be great!
It's because relational attributes are not send in create fonction (See your checklist service add function).
Relations are handled in an other function updateRelations.
The thing you can do is to send values in Checklit.create()
Following is my user schema in user.js model -
var userSchema = new mongoose.Schema({
local: {
name: { type: String },
email : { type: String, require: true, unique: true },
password: { type: String, require:true },
},
facebook: {
id : { type: String },
token : { type: String },
email : { type: String },
name : { type: String }
}
});
var User = mongoose.model('User',userSchema);
module.exports = User;
This is how I am using it in my controller -
var user = require('./../models/user.js');
This is how I am saving it in the db -
user({'local.email' : req.body.email, 'local.password' : req.body.password}).save(function(err, result){
if(err)
res.send(err);
else {
console.log(result);
req.session.user = result;
res.send({"code":200,"message":"Record inserted successfully"});
}
});
Error -
{"name":"MongoError","code":11000,"err":"insertDocument :: caused by :: 11000 E11000 duplicate key error index: mydb.users.$email_1 dup key: { : null }"}
I checked the db collection and no such duplicate entry exists, let me know what I am doing wrong ?
FYI - req.body.email and req.body.password are fetching values.
I also checked this post but no help STACK LINK
If I removed completely then it inserts the document, otherwise it throws error "Duplicate" error even I have an entry in the local.email
The error message is saying that there's already a record with null as the email. In other words, you already have a user without an email address.
The relevant documentation for this:
If a document does not have a value for the indexed field in a unique index, the index will store a null value for this document. Because of the unique constraint, MongoDB will only permit one document that lacks the indexed field. If there is more than one document without a value for the indexed field or is missing the indexed field, the index build will fail with a duplicate key error.
You can combine the unique constraint with the sparse index to filter these null values from the unique index and avoid the error.
unique indexes
Sparse indexes only contain entries for documents that have the indexed field, even if the index field contains a null value.
In other words, a sparse index is ok with multiple documents all having null values.
sparse indexes
From comments:
Your error says that the key is named mydb.users.$email_1 which makes me suspect that you have an index on both users.email and users.local.email (The former being old and unused at the moment). Removing a field from a Mongoose model doesn't affect the database. Check with mydb.users.getIndexes() if this is the case and manually remove the unwanted index with mydb.users.dropIndex(<name>).
If you are still in your development environment, I would drop the entire db and start over with your new schema.
From the command line
➜ mongo
use dbName;
db.dropDatabase();
exit
I want to explain the answer/solution to this like I am explaining to a 5-year-old , so everyone can understand .
I have an app.I want people to register with their email,password and phone number .
In my MongoDB database , I want to identify people uniquely based on both their phone numbers and email - so this means that both the phone number and the email must be unique for every person.
However , there is a problem : I have realized that everyone has a phonenumber but not everyone has an email address .
Those that don`t have an email address have promised me that they will have an email address by next week. But I want them registered anyway - so I tell them to proceed registering their phonenumbers as they leave the email-input-field empty .
They do so .
My database NEEDS an unique email address field - but I have a lot of people with 'null' as their email address . So I go to my code and tell my database schema to allow empty/null email address fields which I will later fill in with email unique addresses when the people who promised to add their emails to their profiles next week .
So its now a win-win for everyone (but you ;-] ): the people register, I am happy to have their data ...and my database is happy because it is being used nicely ...but what about you ? I am yet to give you the code that made the schema .
Here is the code :
NOTE : The sparse property in email , is what tells my database to allow null values which will later be filled with unique values .
var userSchema = new mongoose.Schema({
local: {
name: { type: String },
email : { type: String, require: true, index:true, unique:true,sparse:true},
password: { type: String, require:true },
},
facebook: {
id : { type: String },
token : { type: String },
email : { type: String },
name : { type: String }
}
});
var User = mongoose.model('User',userSchema);
module.exports = User;
I hope I have explained it nicely .
Happy NodeJS coding / hacking!
In this situation, log in to Mongo find the index that you are not using anymore (in OP's case 'email'). Then select Drop Index
Check collection indexes.
I had that issue due to outdated indexes in collection for fields, which should be stored by different new path.
Mongoose adds index, when you specify field as unique.
Well basically this error is saying, that you had a unique index on a particular field for example: "email_address", so mongodb expects unique email address value for each document in the collection.
So let's say, earlier in your schema the unique index was not defined, and then you signed up 2 users with the same email address or with no email address (null value).
Later, you saw that there was a mistake. so you try to correct it by adding a unique index to the schema. But your collection already has duplicates, so the error message says that you can't insert a duplicate value again.
You essentially have three options:
Drop the collection
db.users.drop();
Find the document which has that value and delete it. Let's say the value was null, you can delete it using:
db.users.remove({ email_address: null });
Drop the Unique index:
db.users.dropIndex(indexName)
I Hope this helped :)
Edit: This solution still works in 2023 and you don't need to drop your collection or lose any data.
Here's how I solved same issue in September 2020. There is a super-fast and easy way from the mongodb atlas (cloud and desktop). Probably it was not that easy before? That is why I feel like I should write this answer in 2020.
First of all, I read above some suggestions of changing the field "unique" on the mongoose schema. If you came up with this error I assume you already changed your schema, but despite of that you got a 500 as your response, and notice this: specifying duplicated KEY!. If the problem was caused by schema configuration and assuming you have configurated a decent middleware to log mongo errors the response would be a 400.
Why this happens (at least the main reason)
Why is that? In my case was simple, that field on the schema it used to accept only unique values but I just changed it to accept repeated values. Mongodb creates indexes for fields with unique values in order to retrieve the data faster, so on the past mongo created that index for that field, and so even after setting "unique" property as "false" on schema, mongodb was still using that index, and treating it as it had to be unique.
How to solve it
Dropping that index. You can do it in 2 seconds from Mongo Atlas or executing it as a command on mongo shell. For the sack of simplicity I will show the first one for users that are not using mongo shell.
Go to your collection. By default you are on "Find" tab. Just select the next one on the right: "Indexes". You will see how there is still an index given to the same field is causing you trouble. Just click the button "Drop Index". Done.
So don't drop your database everytime this happens
I believe this is a better option than just dropping your entire database or even collection. Basically because this is why it works after dropping the entire collection. Because mongo is not going to set an index for that field if your first entry is using your new schema with "unique: false".
I faced similar issues ,
I Just clear the Indexes of particular fields then its works for me .
https://docs.mongodb.com/v3.2/reference/method/db.collection.dropIndexes/
This is my relavant experience:
In 'User' schema, I set 'name' as unique key and then ran some execution, which I think had set up the database structure.
Then I changed the unique key as 'username', and no longer passed 'name' value when I saved data to database. So the mongodb may automatically set the 'name' value of new record as null which is duplicate key. I tried the set 'name' key as not unique key {name: {unique: false, type: String}} in 'User' schema in order to override original setting. However, it did not work.
At last, I made my own solution:
Just set a random key value that will not likely be duplicate to 'name' key when you save your data record. Simply Math method '' + Math.random() + Math.random() makes a random string.
I had the same issue. Tried debugging different ways couldn't figure out. I tried dropping the collection and it worked fine after that. Although this is not a good solution if your collection has many documents. But if you are in the early state of development try dropping the collection.
db.users.drop();
I have solved my problem by this way.
Just go in your mongoDB account -> Atlast collection then drop your database column. Or go mongoDB compass then drop your database,
It happed sometimes when you have save something null inside database.
This is because there is already a collection with the same name with configuration..Just remove the collection from your mongodb through mongo shell and try again.
db.collectionName.remove()
now run your application it should work
I had a similar problem and I realized that by default mongo only supports one schema per collection. Either store your new schema in a different collection or delete the existing documents with the incompatible schema within the your current collection. Or find a way to have more than one schema per collection.
I got this same issue when I had the following configuration in my config/models.js
module.exports.models = {
connection: 'mongodb',
migrate: 'alter'
}
Changing migrate from 'alter' to 'safe' fixed it for me.
module.exports.models = {
connection: 'mongodb',
migrate: 'safe'
}
same issue after removing properties from a schema after first building some indexes on saving. removing property from schema leads to an null value for a non existing property, that still had an index. dropping index or starting with a new collection from scratch helps here.
note: the error message will lead you in that case. it has a path, that does not exist anymore. im my case the old path was ...$uuid_1 (this is an index!), but the new one is ....*priv.uuid_1
I have also faced this issue and I solved it.
This error shows that email is already present here. So you just need to remove this line from your Model for email attribute.
unique: true
This might be possible that even if it won't work. So just need to delete the collection from your MongoDB and restart your server.
It's not a big issue but beginner level developers as like me, we things what kind of error is this and finally we weast huge time for solve it.
Actually if you delete the db and create the db once again and after try to create the collection then it's will be work properly.
➜ mongo
use dbName;
db.dropDatabase();
exit
Drop you database, then it will work.
You can perform the following steps to drop your database
step 1 : Go to mongodb installation directory, default dir is "C:\Program Files\MongoDB\Server\4.2\bin"
step 2 : Start mongod.exe directly or using command prompt and minimize it.
step 3 : Start mongo.exe directly or using command prompt and run the following command
i) use yourDatabaseName (use show databases if you don't remember database name)
ii) db.dropDatabase()
This will remove your database.
Now you can insert your data, it won't show error, it will automatically add database and collection.
I had the same issue when i tried to modify the schema defined using mangoose. I think the issue is due to the reason that there are some underlying process done when creating a collection like describing the indices which are hidden from the user(at least in my case).So the best solution i found was to drop the entire collection and start again.
If you are in the early stages of development: Eliminate the collection. Otherwise: add this to each attribute that gives you error (Note: my English is not good, but I try to explain it)
index:true,
unique:true,
sparse:true
in my case, i just forgot to return res.status(400) after finding that user with req.email already exists
Go to your database and click on that particular collection and delete all the indexes except id.
I'm using Sequelize.js for ORM and have a few associations (which actually doesn't matter now). My models get get and set methods from those associations. Like this (from docs):
var User = sequelize.define('User', {/* ... */})
var Project = sequelize.define('Project', {/* ... */})
// One-way associations
Project.hasOne(User)
/*
...
Furthermore, Project.prototype will gain the methods getUser and setUser
according to the first parameter passed to define.
*/
So now, I have Project.getUser(), which returns a Promise. But if I call this twice on the very same object, I get SQL query executed twice.
My question is - am I missing something out, or this is an expected behavior? I actually don't want to make additional queries each time I call the same method on this object.
If this is expected - should I use custom getters with member variables which I manually populate and return if present? Or there is something more clever? :)
Update
As from DeBuGGeR's answer - I understand I can use includes when making a query in order to eager load everything, but I simply don't need it, and I can't do it all the time. It's waste of resources and a big overhead if I load my entire DB at the beginning, just to understand (by some criteria) that I won't need it. I want to make additional queries depending on situation. But I also can't afford to destroy all models (DAO objects) that I have and create new ones, with all the info inside them. I should be able to update parts of them, which are missing (from relations).
If you use getUser() it will make the query call, it dosent give you access to the user. You can manually save it to project.user or project.users depending on the association.
But you can try Eager Loading
Project.find({
include: [
{ model: User, as: 'user' } // here you HAVE to specify the same alias as you did in your association
]
}).success(function(project){
project.user // contains the user
});
Also e.g of getUser(). Dont expect it to automatically cache user and dont override this cleverly as it will create side effects. getUser is expected to get from database and it should!
Project.getUser().then(function(user){
// user is available and is a sequelize object
project.user = user; // save project.user and use it till u want to
})
The first part of things is clear - every call to get[Association] (for example Project.getUser()) WILL result in database query.
Sequelize does not maintain any kind of state nor cache for the results. You can get user in the Promisified result of the call, but if you want it again - you will have to make another query.
What #DeBuGGeR said - about using accessors is also not true - accessors are present only immediately after a query, and are not preserved.
As sometimes this is not ok, you have to implement some kind of caching system by yourself. Here comes the tricky part:
IF you want to use the same get method Project.getUser(), you won't be able to do it, as Sequelize overrides your instanceMethods. For example, if you have the association mentioned above, this won't work:
instanceMethods: {
getUser: function() {
// check if you have it, otherwise make a query
}
}
There are few possible ways to fix it - either change Sequelize core a little (to first check if the method exists), or use some kind of wrapper to those functions.
More details about this can be found here: https://github.com/sequelize/sequelize/issues/3707
Thanks to mickhansen for the cooperation on how to understand what to do :)
I'm working on a custom adapter in sails#0.10.0-rc4 which will support associations but I am having trouble getting them working in conjunction with my adapter. My configuration is a one-to-many association between article and stats. My models and adapter are setup like this:
// api/models/article.js
module.exports = {
connection: ['myadapter'],
tableName: 'Knowledge_Base__kav',
attributes: {
KnowledgeArticleId: { type: 'string', primaryKey: true }
stats: {
collection: 'stats',
via: 'parentId'
}
}
// api/models/stats.js
module.exports = {
connection: ['myadapter'],
tableName: 'KnowledgeArticleViewStat',
attributes: {
count: 'integer',
ParentId: {
model: 'article'
}
}
}
// adapter.js
find: function(connectionName, collectionName, options, cb) {
console.dir(options)
// output
// {where: null}
db.query(options, function(err, res)) {
cb(err, res)
}
}
However, when I try to populate using Article.find().populate('stats').exec(console.log()), my adapter gets {where: null} as options when I would expect it to receive {where: {parentId: [<some-article-id>]}}. It will return a list of articles to me but the field which is supposed to be populated from another model (stats) is just an empty list.
I feel like this is related to the fact that my adapter is not getting the proper where param to search for the related model on the primary key. To test this further, I setup a test one-to-many relationship using the the sails-mongo adapter. In this case the adapter did receive params I expected and the association worked fine.
Does anyone have any idea on why .populate('stats') wouldn't be sending the proper "where" params to my adapter?
Update 3/7
So it seems like what happens in associations is that SomeModel.find() will hit the adapter once and then .populate('othermodel') hits the adapter again using the primary key of the first request. Then the results of both are joined together. In my case, the second hit against the adapter isn't happening for some unknown reason.
Update
The original issue was related to an attribute naming error that's mentioned in the comments below. However, there still appears to be some issue with the final population step mentioned by particlebanana:
Final step will: Take all of the query results from all the returned query operations
and combine them in-memory to build up a result set you can return in
the exec callback.
I'm seeing that all required queries are now firing but they are failing to actually populate the alias. Here's the call with some added debugging output in the form of a gist for easier consumption: https://gist.github.com/jasonsims/9423170
It looks like you are on the right track! The way the operation sets get built up, the .find() on the Article should run with the first log (empty where) and the second query should get run with the parentId criteria in the log. The second query isn't running because it can't build up that parentId array of primary keys when you don't return anything from the first query.
Short answer: you need to return something in the find callback to see the second log, which should match your expected criteria.
The query lifecycle looks something like this:
Check if all query pieces are on the same connection, if not break out which queries will run on which connections
For all queries on a single connection, check if the adapter supports native joins (has a .join() method, if so you can pass the criteria down and let the adapter handle the joins.
If no native join method is defined run the "parent" operation (in this case the Article.find())
Use the results of the parent operation to build up criteria for any populations that need to run. (The parentId array in your criteria) and run the child results.
Take all of the query results from all the returned query operations and combine them in-memory to build up a result set you can return in the exec callback.
I hope that helps some. Shoot me the url of your repo and I will look through it, if it's able to be open sourced, and can help some more if you come across any issues.
Just to summarize, there were multiple issues going on here which were causing associations not to populate:
Custom primary keys
There was a problem with waterline when joining data from models using custom primary keys. #particlebanana fixed this in 8eff54b and it should be included in the next rc of waterline (waterline#0.10.0-rc5).
Malformed SOQL query
When waterline queries the adapter for a second time in order to acquire the child rows, it does so using { foreignKey: [ value ] }. Since the value was a list, jsforce was incorrectly generating the SOQL query since it expected all list values to be accompanied by either $in or $nin operators. I addressed this issue in github/jsforce#9 and it's now included in jsforce#1.1.2.
Model attributes are case sensitive
The models in my project were defined in snakeCase but the json response from Salesforce was using EveryWordCapitalized. This causes 1-to-many joins in waterline to reduce the many child records to one when it runs _.uniq(childRows, pk). Since the model has defined pk == id but the actual value returned from Salesforce is pk == Id, this call to uniq blows away all child records but one. I'm not entirely sure if this should be a waterline bug or not but fixing the capitalization in the model attribute definitions resolved this.
I have a UserService object that is essentially a Service with additional configuration parameters and is attached to a User. In my View I would like to render a list of these UserServices however the model is formed as such:
UserService = Backbone.Model.extend({
defaults: {
id: 0,
user_id: 0, // This needs to reference the user object somehow
service_id: 0, // This needs to reference the service object somehow
length: 216000,
price: 1000
}
});
If I bind this model to the view, what is rendered ends up being the service_id instead of the parameter I need to render: service.name.
My questions are:
What should be stored in the UserService model at service? The full service object? Mongoose ID? Some other ID? (Please specify a suggestion)
Where should I get the information for this service.name / When should I pull the Service object to get that information? It would be nice to be able to do service.name in the view when rendering...
Is there a function to chain--upon loading the model, load related models that are needed?
Overall I just need an understanding of how related models work in Backbone / Express / Mongoose.
Any help is appreciated!
Update: After doing a bit of reading I have a couple different methods I can see:
Within the constructor / initializer load the Service object into the UserService object based on the reference ID returned from the server.
My questions with that one then become... what is the reference ID? Where do I put the newly retrieved object into, possibly in place of the ID?
Use the toJSON method to return an asthetic version of the UserService where it retreives the Service object and would return an object with the service name in it's place:
{
id: ???,
service_name: "this was retrieved from the service object in the toJSON method",
length: "1 hour", // converted from within the toJSON method
price: 10.00 // converted from cents to dollars in the toJSON method
}
Or maybe a combination? Thoughts?
Parse models handle loading related entities well, there is also library called Backbone Relational that can help with this.
Otherwise, my best recommendation is to store the object's ID and fetch the related entity upon success of fetching the first entity.
Anyone needing a code example just comment here and I'll see what I can come up with.