I have a lot of objects with unique IDs. Every object can have several labels associated to it, like this:
123: ['a', 'hello']
456: ['dsajdaskldjs']
789: (no labels associated yet)
I'm not planning to store all objects in DynamoDB, only these sets of labels. So it would make sense to add labels like that:
find a record with (id = needed_id)
if there is one, and it has a set named label_set, add a label to this set
if there is no record with such id, or the existing record doesn't have an attribute named label_set, create a record and an attribute, and initialize the attribute with a set consisting of the label
if I used sets of numbers, I could use just ADD operation of UPDATE command. This command does exactly what I described. However, this does not work with sets of strings:
If no item matches the specified primary key:
ADD— Creates an item with supplied primary key and number (or set of numbers) for the attribute value. Not valid for a string type.
so I have to use a PUT operation with Expected set to {"label_set":{"Exists":false}}, followed (in case it fails) by an ADD operation. These are two operations, and it kinda sucks (since you pay per operation, the costs of this will be 2 times more than they could be).
This limitations seems really weird to me. Why are something what works with numbers sets would not work with string sets? Maybe I'm doing something wrong.
Using many records like (123, 'a'), (123, 'hello') instead of one record per object with a set is not a solutions: I want to get all the values from the set at once, without any scans.
I use string sets from the Java SDK the way you describe all the time and it works for me. Perhaps it has changed? I basically follow the pattern in this doc:
http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerguide/API_UpdateItem.html
ADD— Only use the add action for numbers or if the target attribute is
a set (including string sets). ADD does not work if the target
attribute is a single string value or a scalar binary value. The
specified value is added to a numeric value (incrementing or
decrementing the existing numeric value) or added as an additional
value in a string set. If a set of values is specified, the values are
added to the existing set. For example if the original set is [1,2]
and supplied value is [3], then after the add operation the set is
[1,2,3], not [4,5]. An error occurs if an Add action is specified for
a set attribute and the attribute type specified does not match the
existing set type.
If you use ADD for an attribute that does not exist, the attribute and
its values are added to the item.
When your set is empty, it means the attribute isn't present. You can still ADD to it. In fact, a pattern that I've found useful is to simply ADD without even checking for the item. If it doesn't exist, it will create a new item using the specified key and create the attribute set with the value(s) I am adding. If the item exists but the attribute doesn't, it creates the attribute set and adds the value(s). If they both exist, it just adds the value(s).
The only piece that caught me up at first was that the value I had to add was a SS (String set) even if it was only one string value. From DynamoDB's perspective, you are always merging sets, even if the existing set is an empty set (missing) or the new set only contains one value.
IMO, from the way you've described your intent, you would be better off not specifying an existing condition at all. You are having to do two steps because you are enforcing two different situations but you are trying to perform the same action in both. So might as well just blindly add the label and let DynamoDB handle the rest.
Maybe you could: (pseudo code)
try:
add_with_update_item(hash_key=42, "label")
except:
element = new Element(hash_key=42, labels=["label"])
element.save()
With this graceful recovery approach, you need 1 call in the general case, 2 otherwise.
You are unable to use sets to do what you want because Dynamo Db doesn't support empty sets. I would suggest just using a string with a custom schema and building the set from that yourself.
To avoid two operations, you can add a "ConditionExpression" to your item.
For example, add this field/value to your item:
"ConditionExpression": "attribute_not_exists(RecordID) and attribute_not_exists(label_set)"
Source documentation.
Edit: I found a really good guide about how to use the conditional statements
Related
I'm trying to create a shacl based on the ontology that my organization is developing (in dutch): https://wegenenverkeer.data.vlaanderen.be/
The objects described have attributes (properties), that have a specified datatype. The datatype can a primitive (like string or decimal) or complex, which means the property will have properties itself (nested properties). For example: an asset object A will have an attribute assetId which is a complex datatype DtcIdentificator, which consists of two properties itself. I have succesfully created a shacl that validates objects by creating multiple shapes and nesting them.
I now run into the problem of what we call union datatypes. These are a special kind of complex datatypes. They are still nested datatypes: the attribute with the union datatypes will have multiple properties but only exactly zero or one of those properties may have a value. If the attribute has 2 properties with values, it is invalid. How can I create such a constraint in shacl?
Example (in dutch): https://wegenenverkeer.data.vlaanderen.be/doc/implementatiemodel/union-datatypes/#Afmeting%20verkeersbord
A traffic sign (Verkeersbord, see https://wegenenverkeer.data.vlaanderen.be/doc/implementatiemodel/signalisatie/#Verkeersbord) can have a property afmeting (size) of the datatype DtuAfmetingVerkeersbord.
If an asset A of this type would exist, I could define its size as (in dotnotation):
A.afmeting.rond.waarde = 700
-or-
A.afmeting.driehoekig.waarde = 400
Both are valid ways of using the afmeting property, however, if they are both used for the same object, this becomes invalid, as only one property of A.afmeting may have a value.
I have tried using the union constraint in shacl, but soon found out that that has nothing to do with what we call "union datatypes"
I think the reason you are struggling is because this kind of problem is usually modelled differently. Basically you have different types of Traffic signs and these signs can have measurements. With the model as you described, A.afmeting.rond.waarde captures 2 ideas using 1 property: (a) the type and (b) the size. From your question, this seems to be the intend. However, this is usually not how this kind of problem is addressed.
A more intuitive design is for Traffic sign to have 2 different properties: (a) type and (b) a measurement. The Traffic sign types are achthoekig, driehoekig, etc. Then you can use SHACL to check that a traffic sign has either both or no properties for a traffic sign.
What's the right AQL format to include all values for a multi value property field. Neither #<prop name> nor properties.* seem to work.
When running an AQL query and including a property field which contains multiple values the result contains the first value and not a list containing all values
items.find(...).include("*","#distro")
At present, I run one query to generate a list of artifacts and then iterate through the list running a query for each artifacts properties
f'/api/storage/{artifact.repo}/{artifact.path}/{artifact.name}?properties'
Result
...properties {'key': 'distro', 'value': 'Ubuntu'}
Desired Result
...properties {'key': 'distro', 'value': ['Ubuntu', 'CentOS',...]}
I heard back from jfrog support and the problem seems to be that the use of '#propertyname' allows for the collapse of a potentially multi value property into a single value and this blocks the gathering of all properties.
A more efficient approach would be
items.find(...).include("property")
This results in all properties returned in the json payload as it includes the property domain which includes all the properties.
Additionally, by not using # the query doesn't collapse the properties from lists of values to a single value. So, if build_number is a property it becomes ['25'] instead of 25.
When requesting the property domain, be sure to treat each property as a list.
I would like to have one field appear conditionally based on the value of another. How should I go about achieving this in dexterity?
E.g. One field is a boolean: Is the resource for sale?
If this is set as "yes" I'd like the next field to show up, being an integer- the price of the resource.
If I had to guess, I'd start hacking a javascript solution but I'm assuming there is a technique for doing it in an organised manner, but I can't find anything.
I should also mention that I am doing this to simplify the process of searching through this content later (using eea.facetednav) in which I don't know how to have a boolean search interface return results based on if the integer is > 0.
Some columns in my django table happened to be empty and as a result the text rendered there is 'None'.
I would like to see a blank space instead.
django tables2 has some documentation on the subject, but I don't understand it completely.
Where do I have to define this empty_text behavior parameter? Tried in the relevant class meta, but apparently it has no effect.
You can override the default value in your column definition.
If you are not explicitly declaring your column (for example you are letting tables2 figure it out from your model) then you will have to define it so that you can set options for it. It is ok to do that with data coming from models.. as long as the column name you define matches the model field name it will match them up.
class TableClass(tables.Table):
mycolumn = tables.Column(default=' ')
If you need to dynamically work out your default value on a row-by-row basis then define your column and pass empty_values=[], eg:
class TableClass(tables.Table):
mycolumn = tables.Column(empty_values=[])
This tells tables2 that it should not consider any values to be 'empty'.. you can then declare a custom rendering method for that column:
def render_mycolumn(value):
# This is a very simplified example, you will have to work out your
# own test for blankness, depending on your data. And, if you are
# returning html, you need to wrap it in mark_safe()
if not value:
return 'Nobody Home'
return value
Keep in mind that render_ methods are not called if tables2 thinks the value is blank hence you must also set empty_values=[].
Here is the tables2 documentation which describes how custom render methods work: http://django-tables2.readthedocs.org/en/latest/pages/custom-rendering.html?highlight=empty#table-render-foo-method
Hello friends i am to add optional parameter to pass these in a method the parameter may vary every time.
And i need to pass these parameter to a method, so my question is how should i add these optional parameter to a collection and what kind of collection object should i use and how should i use that.
i elaborate here, i am having following fields.
1)course field(a drop down list) and on selected index change of course a check box list of corresponding branches are visible now i can select branches of choice by putting check mark on check boxes.(both course and branch are compulsory fields)
2)pass_out year which is a compulsory field.(a text field)
3)education gap which is optional so the text box may be empty as well and may having a digit as well.
4)required first year percent, second year, third year, final year, current degree, high school, senior secondary, gradation, post graduation, diploma percent, birth date which are all optional so these fields may also be empty or having a digit in the text box.
5) current backlog(a drop down list)having choices all, yes , no.
6)number of ATKT text box which may also be empty or can have a digit.
So i want to store all these variables value to some collection of object which will passed to a different method by passing all these variable from here,
But i am unable to figure out how should i store these optional variable to some object and how should i pass them to other method where all variable values will be taken out and an appropriate query will be written to interact with the data base to get the data table.
please elucidate me on this please. I am really not getting a feasible solution, i have thought of few options which i can let you know if you demand but those all seems to be tedious and difficult and redundant so i see help from you.
Don't bother with optional parameters or some collection of parameters, just decide how you will represent each value best, including how to represent empty values.
For a string value you can just use a null reference or an empty string. For a numeric value you can use a nullable int (int?). For a list of checkboxes where none is selected you can send an empty list.
When figuring out how to use this in a query to the database, it's easier if you have the values as parameters that always exist even if the values represent an empty value, rather than to have to parse out parameters from a collection where a parameter might be missing. Also, as you have different data types it's better if you can use an appropriate data type for each parameter, instead of casting everything into the same mold just to fit in a collection.