I am following this instruction https://docs.aws.amazon.com/eventbridge/latest/userguide/eb-event-patterns-content-based-filtering.html#eb-filtering-anything-but to setup a event pattern rule with anything-but like below code:
{
"detail": {
"payload": {
"type": [
{
"anything-but": "test"
}
]
}
}
}
In above example, I set the type field in payload of the event to be anything but test. It works fine if the event has payload->type field. But it doesn't accept the event if it payload doesn't have type field. It seems anything-but filter out none-exist field.
As an example, below event payload is accepted:
{
detail: {
payload: {
name: 'xxx',
type: 'production'
}
}
}
but below event which doesn't have type field is not accepted.
{
detail: {
payload: {
name: 'xxx'
}
}
}
How can I let it support none-exist? I'd like to make it accept event who doesn't have such field.
You have certainly moved on with your life since then... but figured I would drop an answer here for anyone else traversing the interwebs in frustration with EventBridge rules...
In the array you are assigning to type, you can include any number of matching options:
{
"detail": {
"payload":
"type": [
{"anything-but": "test"},
{"exists": false}
]
}
}
}
If you need more complex matching that includes multiple fields existing or not, look into $or
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/eventbridge/latest/userguide/eb-event-patterns-content-based-filtering.html#eb-filtering-complex-example-or
I'm following the official [documentation] (https://legacy.adonisjs.com/docs/4.0/validator) && indicative, but I couldn't find anything to help me.
I want to validate if the given param exists on database.
So I tried:
app/Validators/myValidator
const { rule } = use('Validator')
get rules () {
return {
userId: 'required|integer|exists:MyDatabase.users,userId', <-- this is what isn't working
date: [
rule('date'),
rule('dateFormat', 'YYYY-MM-DD')
]
}
}
// Getting the data to be validated
get data () {
const params = this.ctx.params
const { userId, date } = params
return Object.assign({}, { userId }, { date })
}
It gives me the following error:
{
"error": {
"message": "select * from `MyDatabase`.`users`.`userId` where `undefined` = '2' limit 1 - ER_PARSE_ERROR: You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near '.`userId` where `undefined` = '2' limit 1' at line 1",
"name": "ErrorValidator",
"status": 40
}
}
How should I properly indicate that I want to compare MyDatabase.users.userid to the given parameter?
After a few hard try/error I stumbled upon the solution.
Just need to follow what is inside hooks.js and pass the values separated by comma, like so:
get rules () {
return {
userId: 'required|integer|exists:MyDatabase,MyTable,columntoCompare',
}
}
I want to get data about user addinfo(bool value).
when i do console.log(data.user), i can get data.user referred to below picture.
if when i do console.log(data.user.user), it shows that user is undefined referred to below picture.
{
user(token: "eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJ1c2VybmFtZSI6ImI3ZTA5YmVhOTAzNzQ3ODQiLCJleHAiOjE1NjM4OTcxNzksIm9yaWdJYXQiOjE1NjM4OTY4Nzl9.QFB58dAvqIC9RBBohN1b3TdR542dBZEcXOG1MSTqAQQ") {
user {
id
addinfo
}
}
}
this code show that
{
"data": {
"user": {
"user": {
"id": "4",
"addinfo": false
}
}
}
}
I can't see the rest of your code, but if the code is fetching your users, there is a time before the request comes back where your user has not been fetched yet. It looks like your screenshot shows this. There is an undefined before the successful object.
You need to ensure that the data has come back first be checking if the data prop is truthy or some other way to check if the promise has completed yet.
ie
if (!data.user) return 'Loading...';
return (
<Switch>
...
In GraphQL I'm getting user info using e.g. below code:
async getUser(id) {
const result = await this.api.query({
query: gql(getUser),
variables: {
id,
},
});
return result.data.getUser || null;
}
I'm invoking it by:
const user = await userService.getUser(id);
and I do have access to user properties.
Maybe you're trying to get user data before they are retrieved and available?
If I have a repository with many properties and I want to find something by the non-id property, do I just find all and then return the data after a boolean comparison, or is there a better way to find by a property that's not the ID?
In loopback4, you need to use repository for this purpose. Do as below.
For case where you know there will be just one entry with value. (Unique columns)
const user = await this.userRepository.findOne({
where: {
username: 'test_admin'
}
});
For case where there can be multiple.
const user = await this.userRepository.find({
where: {
firstName: 'test admin'
}
});
For Loopback 3, here you find the documentation for querying data: https://loopback.io/doc/en/lb3/Querying-data.html
Basically, use a query filter like this:
const objects = await app.models.ModelName.find(
{
where: {
propertyName: value
}
}
)
Don't forget to define an index for the property you want to query because otherwise, the database engine will perform a full table scan.
"properties": {
"propertyName": {
"type": "string",
"index": {
"unique": true
}
},
...
}
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"}}}
}},
)