DELETE operation javascript fetch() with REST API firebase - firebase

I use the following API request in order to delete all texts (so called cps) of one section (one section contains many cps)
await fetch(`https://12345-default-rtdb.europe-
west1.firebasedatabase.app/cps/${userId}.json?section_id=${mysection}`,{method:'DELETE',
// });
userId is correct, mysections is the current sectionId, section_id is the key of the sectionId in the JSON document. (eg: -N09gWdyQlV7OsPpEx7t or -N09g_HjbcFCQFBiIX0A see below) In this example all cps of all sections are being deleted. So the conditional query does not work.
What is going wrong here? Thanks!
The tree within firestore looks like this:
cps -> user1 -> -N09gWdyQlV7OsPpEx7t
cps -> user1 -> -N09g_HjbcFCQFBiIX0A
....

Related

Flutter cloud firestore : query document->map->array

My db design is above picture. I wanna create a query which returns user where tags are matched. But i didnt any solution to query.
This is my flutter code:
But it doesnt work. How can i query array of map of document?
The courses is an array and not a map so you cannot use the dot notation to query. If the courses is made a collection (or a sub-collection) on it's own then you would be able to query users easily:
users -> {userId}
(col) (doc)
courses -> {courseId}
(col) (doc)
You would have to include a field userId in each course document which would be used to identify which user owns that course.
await firestore.collection("courses").where("tags", arrayContainsAny: tagKeys)
This will return all courses where the tags array contains at least 1 item in the tagKeys list. If you need exact match i.e. all the tags in tagKeys must be present in Firestore document then you would have to restructure the database as mentioned in this answer.
Fetching all matching documents might not be ideal since you just need user IDs that matches the tags. In that case you can store a field which contains tags from all the courses in a single array field in the user document.

Cloud Firestore triggers " Your trigger must always point to a document"

what i am trying to do is ... my document flow
batch(collection) -> {batchName}(document) -> subjects -> {subjectName} -> attendance
i want to trigger firestore function whenever there is an update in the attendance object
So in the documentation of the Cloud Firestore triggers, i found this line "Your trigger must always point to a document" with an example ... here is the link to the documentation
which gave me hope that it is possible to do that and i am failing to achieve this,
exports.attendenceTrigger = functions.firestore.document('batche/{batchName}/subjects/{subjectName}/attendance')
is it possible to do it ? if yes then what am i doing wrong?
You have specified a path to a collection
'batche/{batchName}/subjects/{subjectName}/attendance'
(col) (doc) (col) (doc) (col)
However, your path must point towards a document so valid paths include:
// Triggers a function when a doc in subjects sub-collection is changed
'batche/{batchName}/subjects/{subjectName}'
// or
// Triggers a function when a doc in attendance sub-collection is changed
'batche/{batchName}/subjects/{subjectName}/attendance/{attendanceId}'
Is attendance a sub-collection? If yes, then use the second path above to listen trigger a function when a document in that collection is created/modified/deleted. If attendance is a field in a {subjectName} document then you should use the first line and access the attendance field from the snapshot snapshot.data().attendance.

Is it possible to fetch all documents whose sub-collection contains a specific document ID?

I am trying to fetch all documents whose sub-collection contain a specific document ID. Is there any way to do this?
For example, if the boxed document under 'enquiries' sub-collection exists, then I need the boxed document ID from 'books' collection. I couldn't figure out how to go backwards to get the parent document ID.
I make the assumption that all the sub-collections have the same name, i.e. enquiries. Then, you could do as follows:
Add a field docId in your enquiries document that contains the document ID.
Execute a Collection Group query in order to get all the documents with the desired docId value (Firestore.instance.collectionGroup("enquiries").where("docId", isEqualTo: "ykXB...").getDocuments()).
Then, you loop over the results of the query and for each DocumentReference you call twice the parent() methods (first time you will get the CollectionReference and second time you will get the DocumentReference of the parent document).
You just have to use the id property and you are done.
Try the following:
Firestore.instance.collection("books").where("author", isEqualTo: "Arumugam").getDocuments().then((value) {
value.documents.forEach((result) {
var id = result.documentID;
Firestore.instance.collection("books").document(id).collection("enquiries").getDocuments().then((querySnapshot) {
querySnapshot.documents.forEach((result) {
print(result.data);
});
First you need to retrieve the id under the books collection, to be able to do that you have to do a query for example where("author", isEqualTo: "Arumugam"). After retrieving the id you can then do a query to retrieve the documents inside the collection enquiries
For example, if the boxed document under 'enquiries' sub-collection exists, then I need the boxed document ID from 'books' collection.
There is no way you can do that in a single go.
I couldn't figure out how to go backwards to get the parent document ID.
There is no going back in Firestore as you probably were thinking. In Firebase Realtime Database we have a method named getParent(), which does exactly what you want but in Firestore we don't.
Queries in Firestore are shallow, meaning that it only get items from the collection that the query is run against. Firestore doesn't support queries across different collections in one go. A single query may only use the properties of documents in a single collection. So the solution to solving your problem is to perform two get() calls. The first one would be to check that document for existence in the enquiries subcollection, and if it exists, simply create another get() call to get the document from the books collection.
Renaud Tarnec's answer is great for fetching the IDs of the relevant books.
If you need to fetch more than the ID, there is a trick you could use in some scenarios. I imagine your goal is to show some sort of an index of all books associated with a particular enquiry ID. If the data you'd like to show in that index is not too long (can be serialized in less than 1500 bytes) and if it is not changing frequently, you could try to use the document ID as the placeholder for that data.
For example, let's say you wanted to display a list of book titles and authors corresponding to some enquiryId. You could create the book ID in the collection with something like so:
// Assuming admin SDK
const bookId = nanoid();
const author = 'Brandon Sanderson';
const title = 'Mistborn: The Final Empire';
// If title + author are not unique, you could add the bookId to the array
const uniquePayloadKey = Buffer.from(JSON.stringify([author, title])).toString('base64url');
booksColRef.doc(uniquePayloadKey).set({ bookId })
booksColRef.doc(uniquePayloadKey).collection('enquiries').doc(enquiryId).set({ enquiryId })
Then, after running the collection group query per Renaud Tarnec's answer, you could extract that serialized information with a regexp on the path, and deserialize. E.g.:
// Assuming Web 9 SDK
const books = query(collectionGroup(db, 'enquiries'), where('enquiryId', '==', enquiryId));
return getDocs(books).then(snapshot => {
const data = []
snapshot.forEach(doc => {
const payload = doc.ref.path.match(/books\/(.*)\/enquiries/)[1];
const [author, title] = JSON.parse(atob(details));
data.push({ author, title })
});
return data;
});
The "store payload in ID" trick can be used only to present some basic information for your child-driven search results. If your book document has a lot of information you'd like to display once the user clicks on one of the books returned by the enquiry, you may want to store this in separate documents whose IDs are the real bookIds. The bookId field added under the unique payload key allows such lookups when necessary.
You can reuse the same data structure for returning book results from different starting points, not just enquiries, without duplicating this structure. If you stored many authors per book, for example, you could add an authors sub-collection to search by. As long as the information you want to display in the resulting index page is the same and can be serialized within the 1500-byte limit, you should be good.
The (quite substantial) downside of this approach is that it is not possible to rename document IDs in Firestore. If some of the details in the payload change (e.g. an admin fixes a book titles), you will need to create all the sub-collections under it and delete the old data. This can be quite costly - at least 1 read, 1 write, and 1 delete for every document in every sub-collection. So keep in mind it may not be pragmatic for fast changing data.
The 1500-byte limit for key names is documented in Usage and Limits.
If you are concerned about potential hotspots this can generate per Best Practices for Cloud Firestore, I imagine that adding the bookId as a prefix to the uniquePayloadKey (with a delimiter that allows you to throw it away) would do the trick - but I am not certain.

Which is a more optimal Firestore schema for getting a Social Media feed?

I'm toying with several ideas for using Firestore for a social media feed. So far, the ideas I've had haven't panned out, so for this one I'm hoping to get the community's feedback.
The idea is to allow users to post information, or to record their activity, and to any user following/subscribed to that information, display it. The posts information would be in a root collection called posts.
The approaches, as far as I can tell, require roughly the same number of reads and writes.
One idea is to have within the users/{userId} have a field called posts which is an array of documentIds that I'm interested in pulling for the user. This would allow me to pull directly from posts and get the most up-to-date version of the data.
Another approach seems more Firebasey which is to store documents within users/{userId}/feeds that are copies of the posts themselves. I can use the same postID as the data in posts. Presumably, if I need to update the data for any review, I can use a group collection query to get all collections called feeds, where the docID is equal (or just create a field to do a proper "where", "==", docId).
Third approach is all about updating the list of people who should view the posts. This seems better as long as the list of posts is shorter than the lists of followers. Instead of maintaining all posts on every follower, you're maintaining all followers on each post. For every new follower, you need to update all posts.
This list would not be a user's own posts. Instead it would be a list of all the posts to show that user.
Three challengers:
users/{userId} with field called feed - an array of doc Ids that point to the global posts. Get that feed, get all docs by ID. Every array would need to be updated for every single follower each time a user has activity.
users (coll)
-> uid (doc)
-> uid.feed: postId1, postId2, postId3, ...] (field)
posts (coll)
-> postId (doc)
Query (pseudo):
doc(users/{uid}).get(doc)
feed = doc.feed
for postId in feed:
doc(posts/{postId}).get(doc)
users/{userId}/feed which has a copy of all posts that you would want this user to see. Every activity/post would need to be added to every relevant feed list.
users (coll)
-> uid (doc)
-> feed: (coll)
-> postId1 (doc)
-> postId2
-> postId3
posts (coll)
-> postId (doc)
Query (pseudo):
collection(users/{uid}/feed).get(docs)
for post in docs:
doc(posts/{post}).get(doc)
users/{userId}/feed which has a copy of all posts that you would want this user to see. Every activity/post would need to be added to every relevant feed list.
users (coll)
-> uid (doc)
posts (coll)
-> postId (doc)
-> postId.followers_array[followerId, followerId2, ...] (field)
Query (pseudo):
collection(posts).where(followers, 'array_contains', uid).get(docs)
Reads/Writes
1. Updating the Data
For the author user of every activity, find all users following that
user. Currently, the users are stored as documents in a collection, so this is followerNumber document reads. For each of the users, update their array by prepending the postId this would be followerNumber document writes.
1. Displaying the Data/Feed
For each fetch of the feed: get array from user document (1 doc read). For each postId, call, posts/{postId}
This would be numberOfPostsCalled document reads.
2. Updating the Data
For the author user of every activity, find all users following that
user. Currently, the users are stored as documents in a collection, so this is followerNumber document reads. For each of the users, add a new document with ID postId to users/{userId}/feed this would be followerNumber document writes.
2. Displaying the Data/Feed
For each fetch of the feed: get a certain number of posts from users/{userId}/feed
This would be numberOfPostsCalled document reads.
This second approach requires me to keep all of the documents up to date in the event of an edit. So despite this approach seeming more firebase-esque, the approach of holding a postId and fetching that directly seems slightly more logical.
3. Updating the Data
For every new follower, each post authored by the person being followed needs to be updated. The new follower is appended to an array called followers.
3. Displaying the Data
For each fetch of the feed: get a certain number of posts from posts where uid == viewerUid
Nice, when I talk about what is more optimal I really need a point or a quality attribute to compare, I' will assume you care about speed (not necessary performance) and costs.
This is how I would solve the problem, it involves several collections but my goal is 1 query only.
user (col)
{
"abc": {},
"qwe": {}
}
posts (col)
{
"123": {},
"456": {}
}
users_posts (col)
{
"abc": {
"posts_ids": ["123"]
}
}
So far so good, the problem is, I need to do several queries to get all the posts information... This is where cloud functions get into the game. You can create a 4th collection where you can pre-calculate your feed
users_dashboard
{
"abc": {
posts: [
{
id: "123", /.../
}, {
id: "456", /.../
}
]
}
}
The cloud function would look like this:
/* on your front end you can manage the add or delete ids from user posts */
export const calculateDashboard = functions.firestore.document(`users_posts/{doc}).onWrite(async(change, _context) {
const firestore = admin.firestore()
const dashboardRef = firestore.collection(`users_dashboard`)
const postRef = firestore.collection(`posts`)
const user = change.after.data()
const payload = []
for (const postId of user.posts_ids) {
const data = await postRef.doc(postId).get().then((doc) => doc.exists ? doc.data() : null)
payload.push(data)
}
// Maybe you want to exponse only certain props... you can do that here
return dashboardRef.doc(user.id).set(payload)
})
The doc max size is 1 MiB (1,048,576 bytes) that is plenty of data you can store in, so you can have like a lot of posts here. Let's talk about costs; I used to think firestore was more like to have several small docs but I've found in practice it works equally well with big size into a big amount of docs.
Now on your dashboard you only need query:
const dashboard = firestore.collection(`users_dashboard`).doc(userID).get()
This a very opinionated way to solve this problem. You could avoid using the users_posts, but maybe you dont want to trigger this process for other than posts related changes.
It looks like your second approach is best in this situation.. I don't really understand what #andresmijares was trying to do and he mentioned something like storing posts in a document which is not a good approach, imagine if you have more than 20K posts (which what I think a document can hold) then the document won't be able to store any more data.. a better approach is to store posts as a document inside a Collection (just like in your 2nd option).. So let's recall here what's the best approach.
1)_ You share a post in the (posts "Collection") and in users you're following's (Feed "Collection").. maybe this can be done with cloud function and let's not forget to aggregate (with cloud functions also) the number of posts that needs to appear in the user's profile.
2)_ You follow a user and get all of their posts from the (posts "Collection") into your (Feed "Collection") this way you get to see all of their posts on your feed.
with this approach, there will be a lot of writes once but the read will be fast.. and if your app is about reading more and writing less then there's nothing to worry about unless i'm wrong.

Firebase Firestore Documents changes history (like Activity log/ History for changes in each Doc)

I'm trying to make an Activity log system or history for my docs, so every time a field is modified in a document i want to record or save that so i can see after changes history made on each document.
how i can achieve that ? i don't want to save the full doc on each change and then have tons of duplicated docs, if possible i just want to get the changed field (ex. name: 'john' -> name: 'jack').
i don't want to save the full doc on each change and then have tons of duplicated docs
Once a document has changed it becomes a new document. So you won't have duplicate documents unless you make changes that were previously made. Please also note that in Cloud Firestore there are no field-level permissions or access to a document. It's the entire document, or nothing. So if you want to change a field within a document for example from:
userName = "John"
into
userName = "Jack"
You'll will get the entire document and not only the userName property that has been changed.
Cloud Firestore listeners fire on the document level. There is no way to get triggered with just particular fields in a document.
If you want to get notified only of specific fields, consider adding an extra collection with documents that only contain those fields. This sort of data duplication is quite common in NoSQL solutions such as Firestore and for that, I recommend you see this video, Denormalization is normal with the Firebase Database for a better understanding. It is for Firebase real-time database but same principles apply to Cloud Firestore.
For a database schema you can also take a look at my answer from this post.
The best way to achieve something like this is to store the before and after changes happening to the doc, in a new document, which you can add in a subcollection. The changes are available with cloud functions onUpdate trigger. I have written in depth about this topic on my blog, have a look.
https://blog.emad.in/audit-logs-for-firestore-documents/
You can obtain this by creating a cloud function that triggers on all document updates in all collections:
--trigger-resource=projects/$PROJECT_ID/databases/(default)/documents/{collection_id}/{document_id}
In the cloud function you can obtain all the updated fields and their values through the data object.
Python example:
def main(data, context):
# Extract resource
resource = context.resource
resource_split = resource.split('/')
collection_name = resource_split[-2]
document_id = resource_split[-1]
# Get old fields
data_old_values = data['oldValue']
data_old_values_fields = data_old_values['fields']
# Get updated fields
data_updated_mask = data['updateMask']
data_updated_fields = data_updated_mask['fieldPaths']
# Get new field values
data_new_values = data['value']
data_new_values_fields = data_new_values['fields']
# `data_updated_fields` is a list of the fields that has been changed
# `data_old_values_fields` is a dictionary with the old values of the document
# `data_new_values_fields` is a dictionary with the new values of the document

Resources