I'm creating a form using cfs:autoform to capture a photo and caption from submitted on the client like this:
Photos = new Mongo.Collection("photos");
Photos.attachSchema(new SimpleSchema({
userId:{
type: String,
autoValue:function(){return this.userId},
},
userName:{
type: String,
autoValue:function(){return Meteor.users.find({_id: this.userId}).username},
},
groupMembers: {
type: String
},
comments: {
type: String
},
fileId: {
type: String
}
}));
I've gotten the code to successfully capture and fill in the userId, as well as the comment and uploaded photo, but I can't seem to get it to capture the username.
It's most likely because you're using find instead of findOne. Since find returns a cursor and not a single document you can't access the username value, because it's not a property of the cursor. If you change it to findOne it should work.
userName:{
type: String,
autoValue:function(){return Meteor.users.findOne({_id: this.userId}).username},
}
Related
I have a CosmosDB setup using the Mongo API. I have a collection with a hashed shard on one of the field of the document. When I run commands like db.collection.remove or db.collection.deleteMany I get the following error.
Command deleteMany failed: query in command must target a single shard key.: {"message":"Command deleteMany failed: query in command must target a single shard key."}
I'm not sure how can I mention a shard key as part of the query considering I want the query to run across all the shards.
You need to provide shard key when you want to run commands like db.collection.remove or db.collection.deleteMany.
For example :
My data source as below:
[
{
"id" : "2",
"name" : "b"
},
{
"id" : "1",
"name" : "a"
}
]
And my shared key is "/name". Use db.coll.deleteMany({"name":"a"}) to delete specific shard.
Hope it helps you.
It should be ShardKey which you have chosen when you created cosmosDb collection.
FilterDefinition<Product> filter = Builders<Product>.Filter.Eq("id", 2);
=== 2 is my shardKey
await this._dbContext.GetProducts.DeleteOneAsync(filter);
return RedirectToAction("Index");
Kindly refer an image below , how does it look like in CosmosDB
Shard Key(Partition Key) has to be provided during specification of schema model in the code. Once its provided, we can perform regular operation like save, update and delete as usual.
Example:
const mySchema = new Schema({
requestId: { type: String, required: true },
data: String,
documents: [{ docId: String, name: String, attachedBy: String }],
updatedBy: {
type: {
name: { type: String, required: true },
email: { type: String, required: true },
}, required: true
},
createdDate: { type: Date, required: true },
updatedDate: { type: Date },
}, { shardKey: { requestId: 1 } }
);
In the above code we specified requestId as Shard Key, now we can perform any mongo operations
Example:
let request:any = await myModel.findById(requestId);
request.data ="New Data";
await request.save();
Hope that helps.
This works with all Mongo operations
I'm getting the error "_id is not allowed by the schema" when trying to use an autoform to update a collection via a ValidatedMethod.
As far as I can see from this example and the official docs there is no expectation for my schema to include the _id field, and I wouldn't expect to be updating the id from an update statement, so I have no idea why this error is happening.
If I switch from using the validated method to writing directly to the collection (with a schema attached to the collection that doesn't have the id in) everything works as expected, so I'm assuming the issue is with my the validate in my ValidatedMethod.
Any idea what I'm doing wrong?
Template: customer-edit.html
<template name="updateCustomerEdit">
{{> quickForm
collection="CustomerCompaniesGlobal"
doc=someDoc
id="updateCustomerEdit"
type="method-update"
meteormethod="CustomerCompanies.methods.update"
singleMethodArgument=true
}}
</template>
Template 'code behind': customer-edit.js
Template.updateCustomerEdit.helpers({
someDoc() {
const customerId = () => FlowRouter.getParam('_id');
const instance = Template.instance();
instance.subscribe('CustomerCompany.get', customerId());
const company = CustomerCompanies.findOne({_id: customerId()});
return company;
}
});
Update Validated Method:
// The update method
update = new ValidatedMethod({
// register the name
name: 'CustomerCompanies.methods.update',
// register a method for validation, what's going on here?
validate: new SimpleSchema({}).validator(),
// the actual database updating part validate has already been run at this point
run( newCustomer) {
console.log("method: update");
return CustomerCompanies.update(newCustomer);
}
});
Schema:
Schemas = {};
Schemas.CustomerCompaniesSchema = new SimpleSchema({
name: {
type: String,
max: 100,
optional: false
},
email: {
type: String,
max: 100,
regEx: SimpleSchema.RegEx.Email,
optional: true
},
postcode: {
type: String,
max: 10,
optional: true
},
createdAt: {
type: Date,
optional: false
}
});
Collection:
class customerCompanyCollection extends Mongo.Collection {};
// Make it available to the rest of the app
CustomerCompanies = new customerCompanyCollection("Companies");
CustomerCompaniesGlobal = CustomerCompanies;
// Deny all client-side updates since we will be using methods to manage this collection
CustomerCompanies.deny({
insert() { return true; },
update() { return true; },
remove() { return true; }
});
// Define the expected Schema for data going into and coming out of the database
//CustomerCompanies.schema = Schemas.CustomerCompaniesSchema
// Bolt that schema onto the collection
CustomerCompanies.attachSchema(Schemas.CustomerCompaniesSchema);
I finally got to the bottom of this. The issue is that autoform passes in a composite object that represents the id of the record to be changed and also a modifier ($set) of the data, rather than just the data itself. So the structure of that object is along the lines of:
_id: '5TTbSkfzawwuHGLhy',
modifier:
{
'$set':
{ name: 'Smiths Fabrication Ltd',
email: 'info#smithsfab.com',
postcode: 'OX10 4RT',
createdAt: Wed Jan 27 2016 00:00:00 GMT+0000 (GMT Standard Time)
}
}
Once I figured that out, I changed my update method to this and everything then worked as expected:
// Autoform specific update method that knows how to unpack the single
// object we get from autoform.
update = new ValidatedMethod({
// register the name
name: 'CustomerCompanies.methods.updateAutoForm',
// register a method for validation.
validate(autoformArgs) {
console.log(autoformArgs);
// Need to tell the schema that we are passing in a mongo modifier rather than just the data.
Schemas.CustomerCompaniesSchema.validate(autoformArgs.modifier , {modifier: true});
},
// the actual database updating part
// validate has already been run at this point
run(autoformArgs)
{
return CustomerCompanies.update(autoformArgs._id, autoformArgs.modifier);
}
});
Excellent. Your post helped me out when I was struggling to find any other information on the topic.
To build on your answer, if for some reason you want to get the form data as a single block you can use the following in AutoForm.
type="method" meteormethod="myValidatedMethodName"
Your validated method then might look something like this:
export const myValidatedMethodName = new ValidatedMethod({
name: 'Users.methods.create',
validate(insertDoc) {
Schemas.NewUser.validate(insertDoc);
},
run(insertDoc) {
return Collections.Users.createUser(insertDoc);
}
});
NB: The Schema.validate() method then requires an Object, not the modifier as before.
I'm unclear if there are any clear advantages to either method in general.
The type="method-update" is obviously the way you want to go for updating documents because you get the modifier. The type="method" seems to be the best way to go for creating a new document. It would likely also be the best option in most cases where you're not intending to create a document from the form data.
Is it possible to specify that a field is not updateable using the schema itself rather than defining it in an allow/deny rule?
I am wondering because I use a quickform to allow users to edit their user details based on the users document (accounts package) and I want to prevent them from being able to change the verified state for their email address.
A rule based on user roles would be great to only allow admins and meteor itself to change the state of this field.
I'd be hoping for something like this:
emails: {
type: Array,
optional: true
},
"emails.$": {
type: Object
},
"emails.$.address": {
type: String,
regEx: SimpleSchema.RegEx.Email
},
"emails.$.verified": {
type: Boolean
allowRoles: ['admin','system'] // this does not exist
},
regards, Chris
You have a few different options.
To prevent anyone from updating a field, you can set the denyUpdate field in the flag definition (requires aldeed:collection2)
"emails.$.verified": {
type: Boolean
denyUpdate: true
},
To allow it to be updated by admin's only, you could try a custom validator that checks the userId to see if it is an admin (example requires aldeed:collection2 and alanning:roles)
"emails.$.verified": {
type: Boolean
custom: function() {
if ( this.isSet && this.isUpdate && !Roles.userIsInRole(this.userId, "admin") ) {
return "unauthorized";
}
}
},
You'd probably also want to define a message for the "unauthorized" validation error.
SimpleSchema.messages({
"unauthorized" : "You do not have permission to update this field"
})
This will display an error to the user if they try to change the field.
Alternately, you could simply unset the value provided by non-admin users and allow the rest of the update to go ahead.
"emails.$.verified": {
type: Boolean
autoValue: function() {
if ( !Roles.userIsInRole(this.userId, "admin") ) {
this.unset();
}
}
},
Using simple schema and accounts-password. I'm trying to add in an initial account on start-up, but the email and password are not appearing.
Schemas.User = new SimpleSchema({
username: {
type: String,
regEx: /^[a-z0-9A-Z_]{3,15}$/
},
emails: {
type: [Object],
optional: true
},
"emails.$.address": {
type: String,
regEx: SimpleSchema.RegEx.Email
},
"emails.$.verified": {
type: Boolean
},
profile: {
type: Schemas.UserProfile,
optional: true
}
});
and
Meteor.startup(function () {
Meteor.users.remove({});
if (Meteor.users.find().count() == 0) {
Accounts.createUser({
username: "newuser",
emails: [{address:"test#test.com", verified:true}],
password:"mypassword"
});
}
console.log(Meteor.users.find().fetch());
}
Gives us:
[{_id: 'xxx', username:'newuser'}]
No email or password. No errors. Thoughts?
New users in this system can only be added by existing users, so I haven't been able to test the user submission form.
Accounts.createUser takes a String as an email property for the options parameter. As for the password problem, it is maybe due to the lack of a services property in your schema. Add to your Schemas.User the following property:
Schemas.User = new SimpleSchema({
// ...
services: {
type: Object,
optional: true,
blackbox: true
}
}
Finally, the Accounts.createUser documentation (see first link) states:
On the client, you must pass password and at least one of username or email — enough information for the user to be able to log in again later. On the server, you do not need to specify password, but the user will not be able to log in until it has a password (eg, set with Accounts.setPassword).
It seems to not apply in your case, but as a last resort, try to call Accounts.setPassword(userId, "mypassword") afterwards. The user's id is returned by Meteor.createUser.
i have a project and in some places i need to use the key passed for encryption.
i have this:
schema = {
stores: [store_schema_dominios, store_schema_fechas, store_schema_servidores]
};
var options = {
Encryption: {
//expiration: 1000*15, // optional data expiration in ms.
secrets: [{
name: 'usuario',
key: 'SOME KEY'
}]
}
};
db2 = new ydn.db.Storage(nombreBase,schema,options);
is there some method to get back the 'SOME KEY' back like:
db2.getSchema(function(schema) {
console.log(schema); //this return the Schema
});
i need something like this:
db2.getOptions(function(options) {
console.log(options);
});
i need to re use the Crypt KEY
Please file an issue on https://bitbucket.org/ytkyaw/ydn-db/issues?status=new&status=open
Yes, it should able to get back what is set.