How to remove a key from a RethinkDB document? - rethinkdb

I'm trying to remove a key from a RethinkDB document.
My approaches (which didn't work):
r.db('db').table('user').replace(function(row){delete row["key"]; return row})
Other approach:
r.db('db').table('user').update({key: null})
This one just sets row.key = null (which looks reasonable).
Examples tested on rethinkdb data explorer through web UI.

Here's the relevant example from the documentation on RethinkDB's website: http://rethinkdb.com/docs/cookbook/python/#removing-a-field-from-a-document
To remove a field from all documents in a table, you need to use replace to update the document to not include the desired field (using without):
r.db('db').table('user').replace(r.row.without('key'))
To remove the field from one specific document in the table:
r.db('db').table('user').get('id').replace(r.row.without('key'))
You can change the selection of documents to update by using any of the selectors in the API (http://rethinkdb.com/api/), e.g. db, table, get, get_all, between, filter.

You can use replace with without:
r.db('db').table('user').replace(r.row.without('key'))

You do not need to use replace to update the entire document.
Here is the relevant documentation: ReQL command: literal
Assume your user document looks like this:
{
"id": 1,
"name": "Alice",
"data": {
"age": 19,
"city": "Dallas",
"job": "Engineer"
}
}
And you want to remove age from the data property. Normally, update will just merge your new data with the old data. r.literal can be used to treat the data object as a single unit.
r.table('users').get(1).update({ data: r.literal({ age: 19, job: 'Engineer' }) }).run(conn, callback)
// Result passed to callback
{
"id": 1,
"name": "Alice",
"data": {
"age": 19,
"job": "Engineer"
}
}
or
r.table('users').get(1).update({ data: { city: r.literal() } }).run(conn, callback)
// Result passed to callback
{
"id": 1,
"name": "Alice",
"data": {
"age": 19,
"job": "Engineer"
}
}

Related

Streamsets Data Collector: Replace a Field With Its Child Value

I have a data structure like this
{
"id": 926267,
"updated_sequence": 2304899,
"published_at": {
"unix": 1589574240,
"text": "2020-05-15 21:24:00 +0100",
"iso_8601": "2020-05-15T20:24:00Z"
},
"updated_at": {
"unix": 1589574438,
"text": "2020-05-15 21:27:18 +0100",
"iso_8601": "2020-05-15T20:27:18Z"
},
}
I want to replace the updated_at field with its unix field value using Streamsets Data Collector. As far as I know, it can be done using field replacer. But I'm still didn't get it how to make a mapping expression. How can I achieve that?
In Field Replacer, set Fields to /rec/updated_at and New value to ${record:value('/rec/updated_at/unix')} and it will replace the value. See below.
Cheers,
Dash

ACID update of ElasticSearch Document

I'm trying to build a Tinder-like system right now. Here I need to know which cards have already been seen.
If I save the cards in ElasticSearch, and then have such a document:
{ nama: David, location: {lat, lon}, seenFromUsers: [] }
I'm just wondering if it makes sense to create a list in the object itself. Probably there are 2000 entries in it.
But if I do an update in ElasticSearch, then I always have to pass all 2000 entries. If two users do this at the same time, does one get lost? How can I simply add another ID to the array? Is that even possible?
What other solutions are there?
One other solution would be a complete different approach. Instead if creating documents like this
{
"name": "David",
"location": { "lat": ..., "lon": ...},
"seenFromUsers": ["Laura", "Simone"]
}
think in Relations like this:
{
"name": "David",
"seenBy": "Laura"
}
{
"name": "David",
"seenBy": "Simone"
}
this approach will give you simpler queries, and the ACID problem is solved. New profile views are simply new documents...
As a benefit, you´ll get rid of inner objects and it will be more easy to add additional data to this relation:
{
"name": "David",
"seenBy": "Laura",
"timestamp": ...,
"liked": true
}
{
"name": "David",
"seenBy": "Simone",
"timestamp": ...,
"liked": false
}
And now you´ll be able to do a simple query for all positive likes of a profile, or bi-directional likes/matches...

Ability to CRUD Topic attribute in Google::Apis::ClassroomV1::CourseWork class?

I was wondering if there is a way via the Ruby API doc to modify a Topic for the following class:
Google::Apis::ClassroomV1::CourseWork
Topics were introduced in August 2016 as far as I can tell as a way for teachers to organize their stream:
https://support.google.com/edu/classroom/answer/6149237?hl=en
Does anyone know of a way? I'm okay with making a REST call as well if necessary.
Thanks!
Looking at the JSON response https://developers.google.com/classroom/reference/rest/v1/courses.courseWork.
It doesnt look like they have added the functionality to update a Topic through courses.CourseWork
JSON representation
{
"courseId": string,
"id": string,
"title": string,
"description": string,
"materials": [
{
object(Material)
}
],
"state": enum(CourseWorkState),
"alternateLink": string,
"creationTime": string,
"updateTime": string,
"dueDate": {
object(Date)
},
"dueTime": {
object(TimeOfDay)
},
"maxPoints": number,
"workType": enum(CourseWorkType),
"associatedWithDeveloper": boolean,
"submissionModificationMode": enum(SubmissionModificationMode),
// Union field details can be only one of the following:
"assignment": {
object(Assignment)
},
"multipleChoiceQuestion": {
object(MultipleChoiceQuestion)
},
// End of list of possible types for union field details.
}

Which is the better design for this API response

I'm trying to decide upon the best format of response for my API. I need to return a reports response which provides information on the report itself and the fields contained on it. Fields can be of differing types, so there can be: SelectList; TextArea; Location etc..
They each use different properties, so "SelectList" might use "Value" to store its string value and "Location" might use "ChildItems" to hold "Longitude" "Latitude" etc.
Here's what I mean:
"ReportList": [
{
"Fields": [
{
"Id": {},
"Label": "",
"Value": "",
"FieldType": "",
"FieldBankFieldId": {},
"ChildItems": [
{
"Item": "",
"Value": ""
}
]
}
]
}
The problem with this is I'm expecting the users to know when a value is supposed to be null. So I'm expecting a person looking to extract the value from "Location" to extract it from "ChildItems" and not "Value". The benefit to this however, is it's much easier to query for things than the alternative which is the following:
"ReportList": [
{
"Fields": [
{
"SelectList": [
{
"Id": {},
"Label": "",
"Value": "",
}
]
"Location": [
{
"Id": {},
"Label": "",
"Latitude": "",
"Longitude": "",
"etc": "",
}
]
}
]
}
So this one is a reports list that contains a list of fields which on it contains a list of fieldtype for every fieldtype I have (15 or something like that). This is opposed to just having a list of reports which has a list of fields with a "fieldtype" enum which I think is fairly easy to manipulate.
So the Question: Which format is best for a response? Any alternatives and comments appreciated.
EDIT:
To query all fields by fieldtype in a report and get values with the first way it would go something like this:
foreach(field in fields)
{
switch(field.fieldType){
case FieldType.Location :
var locationValue = field.childitems;
break;
case FieldType.SelectList:
var valueselectlist = field.Value;
break;
}
The second one would be like:
foreach(field in fields)
{
foreach(location in field.Locations)
{
var latitude = location.Latitude;
}
foreach(selectList in field.SelectLists)
{
var value= selectList.Value;
}
}
I think the right answer is the first one. With the switch statement. It makes it easier to query on for things like: Get me the value of the field with the id of this guid. It just means putting it through a big switch statement.
I went with the first one because It's easier to query for the most common use case. I'll expect the client code to put it into their own schema if they want to change it.

Find matching array items in MongoDB document

I am developing a web app using Codeigniter and MongoDB.
In the database I got a document that look like this:
{
"_id": {
"$id": "4f609932615a935c18r000000"
},
"basic": {
"name": "The project"
},
"members": [
{
"user_name": "john",
"role": "user",
"created_at": {
"sec": 1331730738,
"usec": 810000
}
},
{
"user_name": "markus",
"role": "user",
"created_at": {
"sec": 1331730738,
"usec": 810000
}
}
]
}
I need to search this document using both user_name and role. Right now when I am using the below code I get both. I only want to get array items matching both user_name and role.
$where = array (
'_id' => new MongoId ($account_id),
'members.user_id' => new MongoId ($user_id),
'members.role' => $role
);
$this -> cimongo -> where ($where) -> count_all_results ('accounts');
This is an old question, but as of MongoDB 2.2 or so you can use the $ positional operator in a projection so that only the matched array element is included in the result.
So you can do something like this:
$this->cimongo->where($where)->select(array('members.$'))->get('accounts');
This is a repeat of this question:
Get particular element from mongoDB array
Also you might want to use $elemMatch
http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Advanced+Queries#AdvancedQueries-ValueinanArray
Here is the rub -- you aren't going to be able to get the array items that match because mongo is going to return the entire document if those elements match. You will have to parse out the code client side. Mongo doesn't have a way to answer, "return only the array that matches."

Resources