How to populate Comment count to an Item list? - node.js

I have two models in my app: Item and Comment. An Item can have many Comments, and a Comment instance contains a reference to an Item instance with key 'comment', to keep track of the relationship.
Now I have to send a JSON list of all Items with their Comment count when user requests on a particular URL.
function(req, res){
return Item.find()
.exec(function(err, items) {
return res.send(items);
});
};
I am not sure how can I "populate" comment count to the items. This seems to be a common problem and I tend to think there should be some nicer way of doing this job than brute force.
So please share your thoughts. How would you "populate" the Comment count to the Items?

check the MongoDB documentation and look for the method findAndModify() -- with it you can atomically update a document, e.g. add a comment and increment the document counter at the same time.
findAndModify
The findAndModify command atomically modifies and returns a single document. By default, the returned document does not include the modifications made on the update. To return the document with the modifications made on the update, use the new option.
Example
Use the update option, with update operators $inc for the counter, and $addToSet for adding the actual comment to an embedded array of comments.
db.runCommand(
{
findAndModify: "item",
query: { name: "MyItem", state: "active", rating: { $gt: 10 } },
sort: { rating: 1 },
update: { $inc: { commentCount: 1 },
$addToSet: {comments: new_comment} }
}
)
See:
MongoDB: findAndModify
MongoDB: Update Operators

I did some research on this issue and came up with following results. First, MongoDB docs suggest:
In general, use embedded data models when:
you have “contains” relationships between entities.
you have one-to-many relationships where the “many” objects always appear with or are viewed in the context of their parent documents.
So in my situation, it makes much more sense if Comments are embedded into Items, instead of having independent existence.
Nevertheless, I was curious to know the solution without changing my data model. As mentioned in MongoDB docs:
Referencing provides more flexibility than embedding; however, to
resolve the references, client-side applications must issue follow-up
queries. In other words, using references requires more roundtrips to
the server.
As multiple roundtrips are kosher now, I came up with following solution:
var showList = function(req, res){
// first DB roundtrip: fetch all items
return Item.find()
.exec(function(err, items) {
// second DB roundtrip: fetch comment counts grouped by item ids
Comment.aggregate({
$group: {
_id: '$item',
count: {
$sum: 1
}
}
}, function(err, agg){
// iterate over comment count groups (yes, that little dash is underscore.js)
_.each(agg, function( itr ){
// for each aggregated group, search for corresponding item and put commentCount in it
var item = _.find(items, function( item ){
return item._id.toString() == itr._id.toString();
});
if ( item ) {
item.set('commentCount', itr.count);
}
});
// send items to the client in JSON format
return res.send(items);
})
});
};
Agree? Disagree? Please enlighten me with your comments!
If you have a better answer, please post here, I'll accept it if I find it worthy.

Related

MongoDB - Populate document field recursively

I've got a Page:
const PageSchema = new Schema({
children: [{type: mongoose.Schema.Types.ObjectId, ref: 'Page'}]
});
As you can see each Page has an array of children which is also a Page.
Now what I need to do is fetch all "main" pages and populate their children array, easy enough except for the fact that I need to do this recursively since a Page contains an array of Pages.
MongoDB doesn't have any out of the box support for this, it only supports a 2 level deep population.
Here's my current query (removed all extra stuff for readability) without using the current .populate method (since it's not gonna work anyway):
Page.find(query)
.exec((err, pages) => {
if (err) {
return next(err);
}
res.json(pages);
});
I looked at this question which is similar but not exactly what I need:
mongoose recursive populate
That seems to use a parent to populate recursively and it also starts from just 1 document, rather than my scenario which uses an array of documents since I'm using .find and not .findOne for example.
How can I create my own deep recursive populate function for this?
Sidenote:
I am aware that the solution I need isn't recommended due to performance but I've come to the conclusion that it is the only solution that is going to work for me. I need to do recursive fetching regardless if it's in the frontend or backend, and doing it right in the backend will simplify things massively. Also the number of pages won't be big enough to cause performance issues.
You can recursively populate a field also like:
User.findOne({ name: 'Joe' })
.populate({
path: 'blogPosts',
populate: {
path: 'comments',
model: 'comment',
populate: {
path: 'user',
model: 'user'
}
}
})
.then((user) => {});
Please note that for first population, you don't need to specify model attribute, as it is already defined in your model's schema, but for next nested populations, you need to do that.
The answer actually lied in one of the answers from the previous questions, although a bit vague. Here's what I ended up with and it works really well:
Page.find(query)
.or({label: new RegExp(config.query, 'i')})
.sort(config.sortBy)
.limit(config.limit)
.skip(config.offset)
.exec((err, pages) => {
if (err) {
return next(err);
}
// takes a collection and a document id and returns this document fully nested with its children
const populateChildren = (coll, id) => {
return coll.findOne({_id: id})
.then((page) => {
if (!page.children || !page.children.length) {
return page;
}
return Promise.all(page.children.map(childId => populateChildren(coll, childId)))
.then(children => Object.assign(page, {children}))
});
}
Promise.all(pages.map((page) => {
return populateChildren(Page, page._id);
})).then((pages) => {
res.json({
error: null,
data: pages,
total: total,
results: pages.length
});
});
});
The function itself should be refactored into a utils function that can be used anywhere and also it should be a bit more general so it can be used for other deep populations as well.
I hope this helps someone else in the future :)

Mongoose - Optimal way to implement friendships: 2 pointers, pushing once to both arrays?

Question: When creating something like a simple many to many friendship in mongoose, I know how to create it on ONE object, for instance, the code below in the controller shows that I am finding one user, and pushing to his friends array another user, being referenced via ObjectId.
In this way, when I look at the Json file, I can see user with _id of "57ed2e8c9cf3083c2ccec173", has a new friend in his friend's array, and I can run a population to get that friend user document. However, user who was added as a friend does not have these capabilities because his array of friends is still empty.
I know there are multiple ways to go about this, as I have read the docs, which say I could simply now push user 1 into user 2's friends array, but, in the words of the docs: "It is debatable that we really want two sets of pointers as they may get out of sync. Instead we could skip populating and directly find() the stories we are interested in."
In other words, if you have an event model with many users, and user model with many events, and you need to access the array of users from the event document, and the array of events from the user document... Would it be best to just push each instance into each other?
Is this the correct way of thinking?
Thanks
```
app.post('/friendships', function(req, res) {
User.findOne({
_id: "57ed2e8c9cf3083c2ccec173"
}, function(err, user1) {
User.findOneAndUpdate({
_id: "57ed2ebbedcd96a4536467f7"
}, {$push: {friends: user1 }}, {upsert: true}, function(err, user2) {
console.log("success");
})
})
});
```
Yes, this is the correct way of thinking, considering the limitations of Mongo for that sort of data.
When you store such an information in two places, you need to make sure that it is consistent - i.e. either it is present in both places or not. You don't have transactions in Mongo so the only way you can do it is to chain the requests and manually roll back the first one if the second one failed, hoping that it's possible to do (which may not be the case - if the second update failed because you lost a connection to the database, there is a good chance that your rollback will fail as well, in which case your database is left in an inconsistent state).
An alternative would be to store only one half of the relationship - e.g. only store events in users, but no users in events, using your example. That way the data would be consistently stored in one place but then if you wanted to get a list of users for a certain event, you'd have to make a possibly expensive database lookup instead of having it already present in the event document.
In practice in most cases I have seen storing data in two places and trying to keep them consistent.
Though it is usually done with storing documents IDs, so instead of:
{$push: {friends: user1}}
it's usually:
{$push: {friends: user1._id}}
(or just using the _id if you have it in the first place)
And instead of $push you can use $addToSet - see: https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/reference/operator/update/addToSet/
Here is a basic concept of adding a two-directional friendship between id1 and id2:
function addFriendship(id1, id2) {
User.findOneAndUpdate({_id: id1}, {$addToSet: {friends: id2}}, err => {
if (err) {
// failure - no friendship added
} else {
// first friendship added, trying the second:
User.findOneAndUpdate({_id: id2}, {$addToSet: {friends: id1}}, err => {
if (err) {
// second friendship not added - rollback the first:
User.findOneAndUpdate({_id: id1}, {$pull: {friends: id2}}, err => {
if (err) {
// we're screwed
} else {
// rolled back - consistent state, no friendship
}
});
} else {
// success - both friendships added
}
});
}
});
}
Not pretty and not bulletproof but that's the most you can hope for with a database with no transactions where denormalized data is the norm.
(Of course friendship don't always work that way that they have to be bidirectional, but this is just an example of a pattern that is common for any many-to-many relationaship.)

Easy way to only allow one item per user in mongoose schema array

I'm trying to implement a rating system and I'm struggling to only allow one rating per user in a reasonable way.
Simply put, i have an array of ratings in my schema, containing the "rater" and the rating, as such:
var schema = new Schema({
//...
ratings: [{
by: {
type: Schema.Types.ObjectId
},
rating: {
type: Number,
min: 1,
max: 5,
validate: ratingValidator
}
}],
//...
});
var Model = mongoose.model('Model', schema);
When i get a request, i wish to add the users rating to the array if the user has not already voted this document, otherwise i wish to update the rating (you should not be able to give more than one rating)
One way to do this is to find the document, "loop through" the array of ratings and search for the user. If the user has got already a rating in the array, the rating is changed, otherwise a new rating is pushed. As such:
Model.findById(id)
.select('ratings')
.exec(function(err, doc) {
if(err) return next(err);
if(doc) {
var rated = false;
var ratings = doc.ratings;
for(var i = 0; i < ratings.length; i++) {
if(ratings[i].by === user.id) {
ratings[i].rating = rating;
rated = true;
break;
}
}
if(!rated) {
ratings.push({
by: user.id,
rating: rating
});
}
doc.markModified('ratings');
doc.save();
} else {
//Not found
}
});
Is there an easier way? A way to let mongodb do this automatically?
The mongodb $addToSet operator could be an alternative, however i have not managed to use it for this, since that could allow two ratings with different scores from the same user.
As you note the $addToSet operator will not work in this case as indeed a userId with a different vote value would be a different value and it's own unique member of the set.
So the best way to do this is to actually issue two update statements with complementary logic. Only one will actually be applied depending on the state of the document:
async.series(
[
// Try to update a matching element
function(callback) {
Model.update(
{ "_id": id, "ratings.by": user.id },
{ "$set": { "ratings.$.rating": rating } },
callback
);
},
// Add the element where it does not exist
function(callback) {
Model.update(
{ "_id": id, "ratings.by": { "$ne": user.id } },
{ "$push": { "ratings": { "by": user.id, "rating": rating } }},
callback
);
}
],
function(err,result) {
// all done
}
);
The principle is simple, try to match the userId present in the ratings array for the document and update the entry. If that condition is not met then no document is updated. In the same way, try to match the document where there is no userId present in the ratings array, if there is a match then add the element, otherwise there will be no update.
This does bypass the built in schema validation of mongoose, so you would have to apply your constraints manually ( or inspect the schema validation rules and apply manually ) but it is better than you current approach in one very important aspect.
When you .find() the document and call it back to your client application to modify using code as you are, then there is no guarantee that the document has not changed on the server from another process or request. So when you issue .save() the document on the server may no longer be in the state that it was when it was read and any modifications can overwrite the changes made there.
Hence while there are two operations to the server and not one ( and your current code is two operations anyway ), it is the lesser of two evils to manually validate than to possibly cause a data inconsistency. The two update approach will respect any other updates issued to the document possibly occurring at the same time.

Mongodb, incrementing value inside an array. (save() ? update() ?)

var Poll = mongoose.model('Poll', {
title: String,
votes: {
type: Array,
'default' : []
}
});
I have the above schema for my simple poll, and I am uncertain of the best method to change the value of the elements in my votes array.
app.put('/api/polls/:poll_id', function(req, res){
Poll.findById(req.params.poll_id, function(err, poll){
// I see the official website of mongodb use something like
// db.collection.update()
// but that doesn't apply here right? I have direct access to the "poll" object here.
Can I do something like
poll.votes[1] = poll.votes[1] + 1;
poll.save() ?
Helps much appreciated.
});
});
You can to the code as you have above, but of course this involves "retrieving" the document from the server, then making the modification and saving it back.
If you have a lot of concurrent operations doing this, then your results are not going to be consistent, as there is a high potential for "overwriting" the work of another operation that is trying to modify the same content. So your increments can go out of "sync" here.
A better approach is to use the standard .update() type of operations. These will make a single request to the server and modify the document. Even returning the modified document as would be the case with .findByIdAndUpdate():
Poll.findByIdAndUpdate(req.params.poll_id,
{ "$inc": { "votes.1": 1 } },
function(err,doc) {
}
);
So the $inc update operator does the work of modifying the array at the specified position using "dot notation". The operation is atomic, so no other operation can modify at the same time and if there was something issued just before then the result would be correctly incremented by that operation and then also by this one, returning the correct data in the result document.

Using the find method on a MongoDB collection with Monk

I am working through a MEAN stack tutorial. It contains the following code as a route in index.js. The name of my Mongo collection is brandcollection.
/* GET Brand Complaints page. */
router.get('/brands', function(req, res) {
var db = req.db;
var collection = db.get('brandcollection');
collection.find({},{},function(e,docs){
res.render('brands', {
"brands" : docs
});
});
});
I would like to modify this code but I don't fully understand how the .find method is being invoked. Specifically, I have the following questions:
What objects are being passed to function(e, docs) as its arguments?
Is function(e, docs) part of the MongoDB syntax? I have looked at the docs on Mongo CRUD operations and couldn't find a reference to it. And it seems like the standard syntax for a Mongo .find operation is collection.find({},{}).someCursorLimit(). I have not seen a reference to a third parameter in the .find operation, so why is one allowed here?
If function(e, docs) is not a MongoDB operation, is it part of the Monk API?
It is clear from the tutorial that this block of code returns all of the documents in the collection and places them in an object as an attribute called "brands." However, what role specifically does function(e, docs) play in that process?
Any clarification would be much appreciated!
The first parameter is the query.
The second parameter(which is optional) is the projection i.e if you want to restrict the contents of the matched documents
collection.find( { qty: { $gt: 25 } }, { item: 1, qty: 1 },function(e,docs){})
would mean to get only the item and qty fields in the matched documents
The third parameter is the callback function which is called after the query is complete. function(e, docs) is the mongodb driver for node.js syntax. The 1st parameter e is the error. docs is the array of matched documents. If an error occurs it is given in e. If the query is successful the matched documents are given in the 2nd parameter docs(the name can be anything you want).
The cursor has various methods which can be used to manipulate the matched documents before mongoDB returns them.
collection.find( { qty: { $gt: 25 } }, { item: 1, qty: 1 })
is a cursor you can do various operations on it.
collection.find( { qty: { $gt: 25 } }, { item: 1, qty: 1 }).skip(10).limit(5).toArray(function(e,docs){
...
})
meaning you will skip the first 10 matched documents and then return a maximum of 5 documents.
All this stuff is given in the docs. I think it's better to use mongoose instead of the native driver because of the features and the popularity.

Resources