I'm using the following: dynamodb2, boto, python. I have the following code for creating a table:
table = Table.create('mySecondTable',
schema=[HashKey('ID')],
RangeKey('advertiser'),
throughput={'read':5,'write':2},
global_indexes=[GlobalAllIndex('otherDataIndex',parts=[
HashKey('date',data_type=NUMBER),
RangeKey('publisher', date_type=str),
],throughput={'read':5,'write':3})],
connection=conn)
I would like to be able to have the following data that I can query by:
ID, advertiser, date, publisher, size, and color
That means I need a different schema. When I add additional points it does not query unless the column name is listed in the schema.
The problem however is that right now I am only able to query by Id, advertiser, date, and publisher in this case. How can I add additional columns that I can query by?
I read this which appears to say that it is possible:
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerguide/GSI.html
However there is no example here:
http://boto.readthedocs.org/en/latest/dynamodb2_tut.html
I tried adding an additional range key however it doesn't work (cannot have duplicates)
I'd like it to be like:
table = Table.create('mySecondTable',
schema=[
RangeKey('advertiser'),
otherKey('date')
fourthKey('publisher') ... etc
throughput={'read':5,'write':2},
connection=conn)
Thanks!
If you want to add additional range keys you need to use Local secondary index.
You can query the LSI in the same way that you query the base table. You need to provide an exact value for the hashkey and a comparison-predicate for range key.
Related
I am stuck while dynamically forming a new column based certain WHERE clause from another Table in PowerBi. To give more details, let's say I have a table with item numbers associated with a Customer Name. In another table, I have to add a new column, which will dynamically add the item numbers associated with a particular customer and append as a query parameter to a base url.
So, my first table looks like this:
The second table that I want is this:
The query parameter value in the URL, has to be dynamically based on a SELECT query with a WHERE clause and pick up the ItemNumbers using the Customer field which is common between both. So, how can this be done in PowerBi? Any help would be really appreciated :)
I have one table in my model "TableRol" if I want to summarize my Date as the string I can use CONCATENATEX;
URL = CONCATENATE(CONCATENATE("http:\\mysite.com\parametersHere\getitem?='",CONCATENATEX(VALUES('TableRol'[Date]), 'TableRol'[Date],";")),"'")
I'm making a Microsoft Access table where one of the fields is a list of pre-made options. When I make a SQL query on that table it returns the values of the list as strings containing the spelled out choice. I would like to assign numerical values to each element of the list so a SQL query returns a number instead. How do I do this? I know it's possible because I have an access file with such a list but I'm unable to recreate it.
An easy way to do this is to have your combo box use a query of the table as a Rowsource. This query would have the table unique ID in the first field and the field you wish to return as the second field. Then change the setting on the combo box for "Column Count" to 2. If you want to show both fields change the "Column Widths" value to 1"; 1". If you want to show only one field, change the value of one you do not want to see to 0. Now we you refer to this list in an SQL queries, it will use the ID field but show the user the string field.
I have a dynamo-db table with following schema
{
"id": String [hash key]
"type": String [range key]
}
I have a usecase where I need to fetch last 3 rows for a given id when type is unknown.
Your items need a timestamp attribute. Without that they can’t be sorted out filtered by time. Once you have that, you can define a local secondary index with the id as partition key and the timestamp as the sort key. You can then get the top three items from the index.
Find more information about DynamoDb’s Local Secondary Index here.
Add a field to store the timestamp to the schema
Use query to fetch all the records for the given key
Query always returns records sorted by range key, you cannot set a sort order (without changing table's schema), so, sort the records by timestamp in your code
Get top 3 records
If you have a lot of records, use filter expressions to drop extra results. E.g. if you know that latest records will always have a timestamp not older than a hour (day, week or so) you could filter older records.
I noticed that DynamoDB query/scan only returns documents that contain a subset of the document, just the key columns it appears.
This means I need to do a separate Batch_Get to get the actual documents referenced by those keys.
I am not using a projection expression, and according to the documentation this means the whole item should be returned.1
How do I get query to return the entire document so I don't have to do a separate batch get?
One example bit of code that shows this is below. It prints out found documents, yet they contain only the primary key, the secondary key, and the sort key.
t1 = db.Table(tname)
q = {
'IndexName': 'mysGSI',
'KeyConditionExpression': "secKey= :val1 AND " \
"begins_with(sortKey,:status)",
'ExpressionAttributeValues': {
":val1": 'XXX',
":status": 'active-',
}
}
res = t1.query(**q)
for doc in res['Items']:
print(json.dumps(doc))
This situation is discussed in the documentation for the Select parameter. You have to read quite a lot to find this, which is not ideal.
If you query or scan a global secondary index, you can only request
attributes that are projected into the index. Global secondary index
queries cannot fetch attributes from the parent table.
Basically:
If you query the parent table then you get all attributes by default.
If you query an LSI then you get all attributes by default - they're retrieved from the projection in the LSI if all attributes are projected into the index (so that costs nothing extra) or from the base table otherwise (which will cost you more reads).
If you query or scan a GSI, you can only request attributes that are projected into the index. GSI queries cannot fetch attributes from the parent table.
I'm having a little hard time understanding Cassandra. I simply couldn't write this question without making it look like confusing, but as I detail it below it may become clearer.
Suppose I have this datatype that I've created:
CREATE TYPE transaction (
transaction_id UUID,
value float,
transaction_date timestamp,
PRIMARY KEY (transaction_id, transaction_date)
);
PS: I'm using it as if it was a 'class', but that might be a logical mistake of mine, please correct me if it can't be used as such.
Anyway, also I have this Column Family, in which I've created a list of this 'transaction' datatype:
CREATE TABLE transactions_history_by_date (
wallet_address UUID,
user_id UUID,
transactions list <transaction>,
PRIMARY KEY (wallet_address, transaction_date))
WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (transaction_date DESC);
So what I'd like to know if this Column Family above is correct. I'd like to get all the transactions of a wallet, sorted by the transaction date (but the date is a column of the 'transaction' datatype - and to complicate it even more, in this Column Family there's a list of transactions, and not just a single one).
No, in Cassandra you can sort only on the value of the clustering column - in this case you need to move transaction_date into table itself...
To expand on Alex's answer, in your situation I think the best approach would probably be to denormalise your table. Rather than using a UDT, you could create something like this:
CREATE TABLE transactions_history_by_date (
wallet_address UUID,
user_id UUID,
transaction_id UUID,
value float,
transaction_date timestamp,
PRIMARY KEY ((wallet_address), transaction_date, transaction_id))
WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (transaction_date DESC);
Now you can make the following query and the results will be sorted by date:
SELECT * FROM transactions_history_by_date WHERE wallet_address = ...;
Note that I added transaction_id as a second clustering key. If this was omitted the table would not have been able to hold two transactions that had the same wallet_address and the same transaction_date. This is because unique rows are identified by the primary key.