Hello guys , how can i get all information inside this Document with using the field [ ID ] , i tried to use the where Query but i couldn't success with that
I assume you wanna do this on the firebase website. Let me show you how I did this using my collection.
Step 1: Go to Filter by field, then select the field you want
Step 2: Add condition which should be "(==) equal to"
Step 3: Click on Apply
Voila! Now you can retrieve a document using a specific field in firestore.
Anyhow, if you want to retrieve a document using a specific field inside a frontend code. Then it would be a bit different depending on the language or framework you use.
Related
Is it possible to include a user friendly ID field into cosmos db documents? This doesn't need to override the default id field that generates when adding a document but can be a custom one that is simple for an end user to know and search for.
Example document, the ref field is what I want to generate as a simple human readable identifier.
{
"id": "57275754475457-5445444-44420478",
"ref": "45H7GI",
"userId": "48412",
"whenCreated": "D2021-11-09T21:56:31.630",
"tenantId": "5566HH"
}
I'm looking at building a ticketing system and would like a simple ID field for a user to be sent and who can reference when updating/ searching for.
Any help with this would be appreciated.
For your own purposes, you can choose to either use id (which is guaranteed to be unique within a partition) or your own property (such as ref as you defined in your example). For any property other than id, you'd need to add a unique-key constraint when creating the container (and at that point, ref would be unique within any partition, just like id).
Really your choice whether you store your custom id's in id or ref. Just know that, if you ever want to do a direct-read (instead of a query), you can only do a direct-read against an id, not against any other property.
I have some documents in Firestore with two Timestamp fields named lastUpdated and lastProcessed in addition to other fields. lastUpdated field is updated when a user updates the record's fields via web console. lastProcessed field is updated when the backend function processes the document (as a result of user clicking a button).
Following are the possible combinations of these 2 fields.
User has only updated the document, but yet to process (lastUpdated == some_timestamp, lastProcessed == '')
User has updated the document, and then processed (lastUpdated < lastProcessed)
User has updated the document, processed and re-updated (lastUpdated > lastProcessed)
My requirement is to execute a query to get a subset of these records (say top 10), ordered by its most recent timestamp. So when evaluating a record for the ordering, lastUpdated field should be considered for scenarios 1 and 3 above. But lastProcessed field should be considered for scenario 2.
Is this possible with Firestore?
When querying the Firestore database it is not possible to execute the logic you explain in your question (i.e. calculate on the fly the scenario to be applied and define which field shall be used in the query).
One classical solution is to add an extra field to the document which contains the value to be queried for. The value of this field can be calculated (according to the business logic) when you modify the document from your frontend, or via a Cloud Function triggered in the backend each time the doc is changed.
The main advantage of using a Cloud Function is to prevent users modifying the value of this field.
I am using the firestore dashboard to browse through some documents in my collection. In one particular case, I am looking to find a document in a collection called private, but when I enter "id" in the "Filter by field" and specify the ID that I want it to match, the dashboard doesn't find anything.
All I want to do is a find a specific document in a collection via the ID using the dashboard. Any idea how to do this? Seems such a mundane feature that I am just surprised firebase wouldn't have it?!
you can search for one specific document by clicking on the "table header", in your case, "Home > private > 0EU..."
The value you type there is taken as the name of a field to search for. "id" means the name of the field called literally "id". There is one special field name "__name__" which is taken by the Firestore SDK to mean the document ID in some cases (normally specified as FieldPath.documentId()), but apparently the console does not accept that.
What you have here is, in my opinion, a valid feature request for the Firebase console, and you can file that with Firebase support.
Thanks in advance for your advice!
Background
I’m creating a database to track orders placed by customers.
An ‘Orders’ table stores general details about an order like the customer’s name, order date, and delivery-required date.
A separate ‘Order_Items’ table stores the specific items that the customer has ordered.
The is a one-to-many relationship between the ‘Orders’ table and ‘Order_Items’ table, i.e. one ‘Order’ can have many ‘Order_Items’, but each ‘Order_Item’ must be associated with only one ‘Order’.
Current State
Currently, I have a page where the user creates a new ‘Order’ record. The user is then taken to another page where they can create as many ‘Order_Item’ records as are needed for the order.
Desired State
What I would like to achieve is: When a user creates new ‘Order_Item’ records, it automatically allocates the current ‘Order’ record as the foreign key for the new ‘Order_Item’ record.
What I've Tried So Far
Manual Action By The User: One way of establishing the link between an 'Order' and all of its 'Order_Items' would be to add a drop-down widget which which effectively asks the user something like "Which order number do all of these items belong to"? The user's action would then establish the link between the two tables and associate one 'Order' with many 'Order_Items'. However, my goal is for this step to be handled programatically instead.
Official Documentation: I’ve referred to the offical documentation which was useful, but as I'm still learning I don’t really know exactly what to search for. The prefetch feature appeared promising but does not actually establish a link; it just loads associated records more efficiently.
App Maker Tutorials: I found an App Maker tutorial which creates an HR App where a user can create a list of ‘Departments’, then create a list of ‘Employees’, and then link an ‘Employee’ to a ‘Department’. However, in the example app this connection is established manually by the user. In my desired state I would like the link to be established programatically.
Manual Save Mode:
I’ve also tried switching to manual save mode so that the user has to create a draft ‘Orders’ record and then several draft ‘Order Items’ records and then save them all at once. However, I haven’t managed to make this work. I’m not sure whether the failure of this approach is because 1) I’m try to create draft records on more than one table, 2) I’m just not doing it correctly, or 3) I thought I read somewhere that draft records are deprecated.
Other Ideas
I'm very new to this field and am may be wrong, but I have a feeling I may need to use some scripting to establish the link. For example, maybe I could use a global variable to remember which 'Order' the user creates. Then, for each 'Order_Item' I could use the onBeforeCreate event to trigger a script that establishes the link between the 'Order_Item' and the 'Order' that was remembered from the previously established global variable.
Updated Question
Thanks Markus and Morfinismo for your answers. I have been using both answers with some success.
Morfinismo: I've successfully used the code you directed me to on existing records but cannot seem to get it to work for newly created records.
For example:
widget.datasource.createItem(); // This creates a new record
var managerRecord = app.datasources.Manager.item; // This sets the Manager of the currently selected parent record as a variable successfully.
var teamRecord = app.datasources.Teams.item; // This attempts to set the Manager of the currently selected record as a variable. However, the record that was created in line 1 is not selected. Therefore, App Maker does not seem to know which record this line of code relates to and returns the error Cannot set property ‘Manager’ of null.
// Assign the manager to the team.
teamRecord.Manager = managerRecord; // This successfully assigns the manager but only in cases where the previous line of code was successful (i.e. existing records and not newly created ones).
Do you have any suggestions or comments on how to apply this code to records that are created by the initial line of code in line 1?
I have found the easiest way to create related items for situations such as yours is to actually import a form with the datasource set to Parent: Child (relation) or Parent: Child (relation) (create). So in your case the datasource would need to be set to Order: Order_Items (relation).
You can get this accomplished in two different ways using the form widget wizard:
Option 1:
If your page datasource is set to Order_Items, drag your form on your page.
In the datasource selection section, your datasource in the form widget should default to `Inherited: Order_Items'. Click the 'Advanced' button in the bottom left corner, then from the datasources category find Order as your datasource, then select relations in the next field, and then Order_Items in the next field, choose 'Insert only' or 'Edit' form and then the appropriate fields you want in the form.
Now every item that gets created in that form will automatically be a child record of the currently selected record in your Order datasource.
Option 2:
If your page datasource is set to Order, drag your form on your page.
In the datasource selection section, your datasource in the form widget should default to Inherited: Order. Scroll down in your datasource selection section until you find Order: Order_Items (relation), then choose 'Insert only' or 'Edit' form and then the appropriate fields you want in the form.
Now every item that gets created in that form will automatically be a child record of the currently selected record in your Order datasource.
In your Order model, make sure that the security setting is set appropriately that a user is allowed to create relations of Order_Items in Order. That is the simplest approach in my opinion since you don't have to hard code the parent into your form or client/server scripts. It is automatically based on the currently selected parent, and is essentially doing the same thing that #Morfinismo explained in the client script section.
The comment I placed under your question included a link to the official documentation that explains what you need. Anyways, your question is not clear enough to determine whether you are creating the records via client script or server script, hence this is a very general answer.
To manage relations via client script:
var managerRecord = app.datasources.Manager.item;
var teamRecord = app.datasources.Teams.item;
// Assign the manager to the team.
teamRecord.Manager = managerRecord;
// Changes are saved automatically if the datasource in auto-save mode
// Add a team member to a Manager's team.
// Note: Retrieve Members on the client before proceeding, such as by using prefetch option in datasource - datasources Team -> Members)
var engineerRecord = app.datasources.TeamMember.item;
teamRecord.Members.push(engineerRecord);
To manage relations via server script:
// Get the record for the Team to modify.
var teamRecord = app.models.Teams.getRecord("team1");
// Assign a manager to the Team.
var managerRecord = app.models.EmployeeDB.getRecord("manager1");
teamRecord.Manager = managerRecord;
// Note: The new association is not saved yet
// Assign a team member to the Team.
var engineerRecord = app.models.EmployeeDB.getRecord("engineer1");
teamRecord.Members.push(engineerRecord);
// Save both changes to the database.
app.saveRecords([teamRecord]);
The above information is taken directly from the official documentation, which like I said, I referred to in the comment I placed under your question.
I am new to Kibana. I have successfully installed Logstash ,Elasticsearch and Kibana. All the links or documents i read have simple query syntax like search by text,by typing phrase or putting logical operators .but all this is so basic.
How can we query in detail.for example i have logs of my magento store and the logs have time stamp,product ID and the action that is the product is purchased or viewed or removed like that.
I imported these logs in kibana via logstash.
Now i want to query logs for the action field not different fields.When i query the logs it returns me logs that have added action and logs that have remove action.The query is "added" OR "removed" when i do "added" AND "removed" there are no logs given because these both words are of same field type and kibana does not allow this it returns zero records because any particular log cant have two valuesin the action field that is product added and removed.I need to know the product which is added and removed the most by people and do a visualization of that.
please suggest if there are any tutorial for studying kibana lik, how to configure it learn to write complex queries
You can try to parse your logs in Logstash to multiple fields.
As your requirement, say add field-"Action" and field "Product".
In the Kibana you can add Table with terms set to "Product" field.
So, when you search for "Added", the table will show out all the product with Added action.
I wanted to match two disparate search terms in the SAME field using logical operators. For example, a field called 'product_comments' has value 'residential plumbing bathroom sink", and I want "residential" AND "sink" to match.
The documentation here: https://lucene.apache.org/core/2_9_4/queryparsersyntax.html#AND says this is possible, just as OP originally tried.
Using Kibana 5.1.1 I found that logical operator is case sensitive:
"residential" and "sink" matched documents with the word 'and' in it, but
"residential" AND "sink" worked as expected