I have created a dynamoDB table in AWS account contains the field names/table headers as follows:
Name (partitionkey)
Id
Place
Received_Input
Comment
However,in the AWS console these field names are positioned in alphabetical order except the Name field as this is a partition key and it will be always in firat column as follows:
Name (partitionkey)
Comment
Id
Received_Input
Place
But I want the table field names should be adjusted according to the requirement whenever I open the table in AWS console. Could anyone suggest how can we rearrange the columns based on the requirements??
Related
A DynamoDB table has a non key column called Name
I want to be able to take all the unique Name from this table and populate a new table with just one column also Name (Partition Key).
My attempts with Lambda and DynamoDB Streams has been futile so far.
Can some one please guide me along the right path?
I have two tables, category (pk) and foreign key table Item(fk).
In item table have itemid, item name,category I'd....and this category I'd is foreign key column with primary table...which is having category I'd, Category name.
And I have relationship between category table as parent and. Item table as child table....category I'd is the relationship between them. When I delete records based on itemid the records should be deleted from the application but maintained at backed level..as I do not want duplicate item...even I have deleted from application.
At Application level I am doing these things with textboxes for and drop down list which should category names.
If I have got you correctly, what you want to do is, maintain the data in the database table even if you delete it from the application interface.
If that is the case, you simply can add a column like 'isDeleted' in both of the tables in the database. In the delete event, just fire the update statement instead of actually deleting the record and set the 'isDeleted' field value to 'True'. At the time of displaying data from the tables, just select the records having 'isDeleted' value equals to 'False'.
I've seen enough answers to know you can't easily check for columns in SQLITE before adding. I'm trying to make a lazy person's node in Node-Red where you pass a message to SQLITE which is the query. Adding a table if it does not exist is easy.
msg.topic='create table IF NOT EXISTS fred (id PRIMARY KEY);'; node.send(msg);
it occurred to me that adding a table which had the names of the fields would be easy - and if the field name is not in the table.... then add the field. BUT you can't add multiple fields at once - so I can't do this...
msg.topic='create table IF NOT EXISTS fred (id PRIMARY KEY, myfields TEXT);'; node.send(msg);
The problem with THAT is that I can't add this in later, there's no way to check before adding a field it the table exists!
This is what I WANT
msg.topic='create table IF NOT EXISTS fred (id PRIMARY KEY, myfields TEXT);'; node.send(msg);
msg.topic='if not (select address from myfields) alter table fred add column address text';
I just cannot think of any way to do this - any ideas anyone (the idea is that the node-red node would input a table, field and value and if the table didn't exist it would be created, if the field didn't exist it would be created, all before trying to add in the value).
You won't be able to make the ALTER TABLE conditional in the SQL itself. You'll need to handle that from your calling script.
Alternately, simply attempt to add the column to the table and accept failure as an outcome. Assuming the table exists, the only failure reason you could encounter is that the column already exists.
If you'd like to do something more graceful, you can check if the column exists in advance, then conditionally run the SQL from your calling application.
I'm new to DynamoDB - I already have an application where the data gets inserted, but I'm getting stuck on extracting the data.
Requirement:
There must be a unique table per customer
Insert documents into the table (each doc has a unique ID and a timestamp)
Get X number of documents based on timestamp (ordered ascending)
Delete individual documents based on unique ID
So far I have created a table with composite key (S:id, N:timestamp). However when I come to query it, I realise that since my id is unique, because I can't do a wildcard search on ID I won't be able to extract a range of items...
So, how should I design my table to satisfy this scenario?
Edit: Here's what I'm thinking:
Primary index will be composite: (s:customer_id, n:timestamp) where customer ID will be the same within a table. This will enable me to extact data based on time range.
Secondary index will be hash (s: unique_doc_id) whereby I will be able to delete items using this index.
Does this sound like the correct solution? Thank you in advance.
You can satisfy the requirements like this:
Your primary key will be h:customer_id and r:unique_id. This makes sure all the elements in the table have different keys.
You will also have an attribute for timestamp and will have a Local Secondary Index on it.
You will use the LSI to do requirement 3 and batchWrite API call to do batch delete for requirement 4.
This solution doesn't require (1) - all the customers can stay in the same table (Heads up - There is a limit-before-contact-us of 256 tables per account)
I am using Visual Web Developer and Microsoft SQL server. I have a tag table "Entry_Tag" which is as follows:
entry_id
tag_id
I want to make the entry_id and tag_id pairing unique. A particular tag can only be applied to an entry once in the table. I made the two columns a primary key. They are also both foreign keys referencing the ids in their respective tables. When I dragged the tables into the Object Relationship Designer it only showed a relationship line between either "Entry_Tag" and "Entry" or when I tried again between "Entry_tag" and "Tag".
The "Entry_tag" table should have a relationship with both "Tag" and "Entry".
How do I go about doing this?
In general, you can add a unique constraint on the table that includes both columns. In this case, including both of the columns in the primary key should have already done this. If you have relationships set up for each field to other tables, then I believe those relationships should be displayed in the query designer... I see no cause for this given the information you've provided - perhaps you need to post more information.
Create an UNIQUE INDEX to for entry_id and tag_id.
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX index_name ON table (entry_id, tag_id)