I want to know the value of "Test1" whose "createdTs" value is greater than or equal to 444.
[
{
"raw" : {
"Test1":"Apple",
"Test2":{
"createdTs": 333,
"langCode": "ko"
}
}
},
{
"raw" : {
"Test1":"Tomato",
"Test2":{
"createdTs": 555,
"langCode": "ko"
}
}
}
]
Even if I call Jsonpath as shown below, it does not work.
$[?(#.['Test2'].createdTs > 444)]
The result I want is like below.
"raw" : {
"Test1":"Tomato",
"Test2":{
"createdTs": 555,
"langCode": "ko"
}
}
To access the path you need to specify all the attributes from parent node till the child node.
$[?(#.raw.Test2.createdTs > 444)]
Kindly go through the documentation completly to learn and understand how jayway jsonpath works. https://github.com/json-path/JsonPath#getting-started
Online Test Tool : https://jsonpath.herokuapp.com/
Related
I need to filter an array in my AWS Step Functions state. This seems like something I should easily be able to achieve with JsonPath but I am struggling for some reason.
The state I want to process looks like this:
{
"items": [
{
"id": "A"
},
{
"id": "B"
},
{
"id": "C"
}
]
}
I want to filter this array by removing entries for which id is not in a specified whitelist.
To do this, I define a Pass state in the following way:
"ApplyFilter": {
"Type": "Pass",
"ResultPath": "$.items",
"InputPath": "$.items.[?(#.id in ['A'])]",
"Next": "MapDeployments"
}
This makes use of the JsonPath in operator.
Unfortunately when I execute the state machine I receive an error:
{
"error": "States.Runtime",
"cause": "An error occurred while executing the state 'ApplyFilter' (entered at the event id #8). Invalid path '$.items.[?(#.id in ['A'])]' : com.jayway.jsonpath.InvalidPathException: com.jayway.jsonpath.InvalidPathException: Space not allowed in path"
}
However, I don't understand what is incorrect with the syntax. When I test here everything works correctly.
What is wrong with what I have done? Is there another way of achieving this sort of filter using JsonPath?
According to the official AWS docs for Step Functions,
The following in paths are not supported # .. , : ? *
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/step-functions/latest/dg/amazon-states-language-paths.html
This is the error I receive:
"error" : "Index not defined, add \".indexOn\": \"release/date\", for path \"/north_america\", to the rules"
And this is the structure of my firebase data:
And my added rules don't seem to work, any help?
Try updating your database rules again with the index another level down.
"likes": {
"north_america": {
"$someid": {
"release": {
".indexOn": ["date"]
}
}
}
Also you should be able to wildcard out north_america so it works globally.
I'm trying to find if there's a nice way using SelectTokens and JsonPath to find all controls with type="check" and no "options". So an example JSON could be:
Value = #"{
""subsections"": [
{
""name"": ""Subsection Name"",
""caption"": ""Subsection Caption""
},
],
""controls"": [
{ ""type"" : ""check"",
""name"" : ""Checkbox2"",
""caption"" : ""Checkbox Caption 2"",
""options"" : [
{ ""caption"" : ""Yes"" },
{ ""caption"" : ""No"" }
]
},
{ ""type"" : ""check"",
""name"" : ""Checkbox2"",
""caption"" : ""Checkbox Caption 2"",
}
]
}"
I'm trying things like: $..controls[?(#.type=='check' && !(#.options))] but I can't see any option to test for a not exists.
The only option that I can think of is getting all check types and then using Linq to filter those without options. Just wondering if there is a way to do it solely through JsonPath?
Kind regards
Sidharth
I'm trying to get started with Firebase and I just want to make sure that this data structure is optimized for Firebase.
The conversation object/tree/whatever looks like this:
conversations: {
"-JRHTHaKuITFIhnj02kE": {
user_one_id: "054bd9ea-5e05-442b-a03d-4ff8e763030b",
user_two_id: "0b1b89b7-2580-4d39-ae6e-22ba6773e004",
user_one_name: "Christina",
user_two_name: "Conor",
user_one_typing: false,
user_two_typing: false,
last_message_text: "Hey girl, what are you doing?",
last_message_type: "TEXT",
last_message_date: 0
}
}
and the messages object looks like so:
messages: {
"-JRHTHaKuITFIhnj02kE": {
conversation: "-JRHTHaKuITFIhnj02kE",
sender: "054bd9ea-5e05-442b-a03d-4ff8e763030b",
message: "Hey girl, what are you doing?",
message_type: "TEXT",
message_date: 0
}
}
Is storing the name relative to the user in the conversation object needed, or can I easily look up the name of the user by the users UID on the fly? Other than the name question, is this good? I don't want to get started with a really bad data structure.
Note: Yes, i know the UID for the conversation & message are the same, I got tired of making up variables.
I usually model the data that I need to show in a single screen in a single location in the database. That makes it possible to retrieve that data with a single read/listener.
Following that train of thought it makes sense to keep the user name in the conversation node. In fact, I usually keep the username in each message node too. The latter prevents the need for a lookup, although in this case I might be expanding the data model a bit far for the sake of keep the code as simple as possible.
For the naming of the chat: if this is a fairly standard chat app, then user may expect to have a persistent 1:1 chat with each other, so that every time you and I chat, we end up in the same room. A good approach for accomplishing that in the data model, can be found in this answer: Best way to manage Chat channels in Firebase
I don't think you structured it right. You should bare in mind "What if" complete analysis.
Though, I would recommend structuring it this way (I made it up for fun, not really tested in-terms of performance when getting a huge traffic. but you can always do denormalization to increase performance when needed):
{
"conversation-messages" : {
"--JpntMPN_iPC3pKDUX9Z" : {
"-Jpnjg_7eom7pMG6LDe1" : {
"message" : "hey! Who are you?",
"timestamp" : 1432165992987,
"type" : "text",
"userId" : "user:-Jpnjcdp6YXM0auS1BAT"
},
"-JpnjibdwWpf1k-zS3SD" : {
"message" : "Arya Stark. You?",
"timestamp" : 1432166001453,
"type" : "text",
"userId" : "user:-OuJffgdYY0jshTFD"
},
"-JpnkqRjkz5oT9sTrKYU" : {
"message" : "no one. a man has no name.",
"timestamp" : 1432166295571,
"type" : "text",
"userId" : "user:-Jpnjcdp6YXM0auS1BAT"
}
}
},
"conversations-metadata" : { // to show the conversation list from all users for each user
"-JpntMPN_iPC3pKDUX9Z" : {
"id": "-JpntMPN_iPC3pKDUX9Z",
"date":995043959933,
"lastMsg": "no one. a man has no name.",
"messages_id": "-JpntMPN_iPC3pKDUX9Z"
}
},
"users" : {
"user:-Jpnjcdp6YXM0auS1BAT" : {
"id" : "user:-Jpnjcdp6YXM0auS1BAT",
"name" : "many-faced foo",
"ProfileImg" : "...."
"conversations":{
"user:-Yabba_Dabba_Doo" : {
"conversation_id": "-JpntMPN_iPC3pKDUX9Z",
"read" : false
}
}
},
"user:-Yabba_Dabba_Doo" : {
"id" : "user:-Yabba_Dabba_Doo",
"name" : "Arya Stark",
"ProfileImg" : "...."
"conversations":{
"user:-Jpnjcdp6YXM0auS1BAT" : {
"conversation_id": "-JpntMPN_iPC3pKDUX9Z",
"read" : true
}
}
}
}
}
I have been researching Firebase as an alternative to the recently deprecated Dropbox Datastore API. I read the articles about structuring data, but I’m still a little unclear.
I have a bunch of users:
users
- name
- email
...and each user has three database “tables”, aircraft, entries, and customFields.
aircraft
- name
- category
- make
entries
- flightDate
- departure
- destination
customFields
- name
- type
So would my Firebase data structure look something like this?
{
“users”: {
“bob”: {
“name”: …
“email”: …
},
“sally”: {
“name”: …
“email”: …
}
},
“aircraft”:{
???
},
“entries”:{
???
},
“customFields”:{
???
}
}
Thanks in advance.
Are you familiar with OOP? Each "table" is an object. Personally I would do something as follows. Since I don't understand what you're trying to achieve with the database and their objects, this may not be correct:
{
"user": {
"name": "bob",
"aircraft": {
"name": "name"
},
"entries": {
"flightdate": "27/05/2015"
}
}
}
Think in objects, not tables. Think parent and child.
But in your example, if each object (user, aircraft, entries etc.) was plurals, you can treat them as a "table", it would just be an array of objects:
{
"aircrafts":[
{
"id":1,
"name": "name"
},
{
"id":2,
"name": "name"
}
]
}
Edit: My first example was if each user had an aircraft, in retrospect it was silly, but my point still stands.