how to handle user changing query parameters in google app engine - google-app-engine

I have a listing site having a model with many properties on which I would like to use filters. I would like to use memcache and cursor for querying, e.g:
results=Model.all().filter("x =", a).filter("y =",b).with_cursor(cursor).fetch(20).
How should I handle cursor and pagination, when the user change the filter criteria, e.g.
from `x=a to x=c`?
Should I store cursor having key = query string? But then the query string changes with page numbers :( . I guess i will need to parse query string, remove page numbers and use that as a key for cursor. Is that how I should do it?

You can make an "hash" of your current filter, and pass it to view. That can be stores there as an hidden field, like <input type="hidden" name="prev_query" value="{{query_hash}}"/>
On second request you'll check that current filter's hash equals to passed as parameter.
'Hash' maybe md5 of your filter params, or just join concatenation of them.

Think of a cursor like a bookmark, holding place in a result set. Cursors are specific to the query they are for. You can't use the same cursor for two different queries - that would be akin to expecting a bookmark from one book to show you how far through you are in another.
If you want to store cursors elsewhere, you'll need to key them by the filter criteria so you can look up the appropriate one. Memcache is a poor choice, though, as elements may be evicted at any time. Why not just make the cursor part of the 'next page' URL?

Related

Cloud Firestore change field name

my database like;
I want, when announcement0 field is deleted, announcement1 field name to change announcement0. Is there a way to do this ?
There is no way to rename fields in Firestore, let alone to have that happen automatically.
It sounds like you have multiple announcements in your document however. In that case, you could consider storing all announcements in a single array field announcements. In an array field, when you remove the first item (at index 0) all other items after that shift down in the array to take its place, which seems to be precisely what you want.
You cannot rename fields in a document. You'll have to delete and recreate it.
Now I'm assuming the number just defines the order of document. If that's the case you can use this workaround, instead of looking for 'announcement0' on client side, you can just store a number field in the document such as 0 in announcement0 and so on. So to get announcement1 when announcement0 is deleted you can uses this query:
const firstAnnouncement = await dbRef.orderBy('number').limit(1).get()
This will get the announcement with least number (highest rank). You can change the limit as per your needs.
But if renaming fields is needed then you'll have to delete and recreate all trailing announcements.

Django Query Optimisation

I am working currently on telecom analytics project and newbie in query optimisation. To show result in browser it takes a full minute while just 45,000 records are to be accessed. Could you please suggest on ways to reduce time for showing results.
I wrote following query to find call-duration of a person of age-group:
sigma=0
popn=len(Demo.objects.filter(age_group=age))
card_list=[Demo.objects.filter(age_group=age)[i].card_no
for i in range(popn)]
for card in card_list:
dic=Fact_table.objects.filter(card_no=card.aggregate(Sum('duration'))
sigma+=dic['duration__sum']
avgDur=sigma/popn
Above code is within for loop to iterate over age-groups.
Model is as follows:
class Demo(models.Model):
card_no=models.CharField(max_length=20,primary_key=True)
gender=models.IntegerField()
age=models.IntegerField()
age_group=models.IntegerField()
class Fact_table(models.Model):
pri_key=models.BigIntegerField(primary_key=True)
card_no=models.CharField(max_length=20)
duration=models.IntegerField()
time_8bit=models.CharField(max_length=8)
time_of_day=models.IntegerField()
isBusinessHr=models.IntegerField()
Day_of_week=models.IntegerField()
Day=models.IntegerField()
Thanks
Try that:
sigma=0
demo_by_age = Demo.objects.filter(age_group=age);
popn=demo_by_age.count() #One
card_list = demo_by_age.values_list('card_no', flat=True) # Two
dic = Fact_table.objects.filter(card_no__in=card_list).aggregate(Sum('duration') #Three
sigma = dic['duration__sum']
avgDur=sigma/popn
A statement like card_list=[Demo.objects.filter(age_group=age)[i].card_no for i in range(popn)] will generate popn seperate queries and database hits. The query in the for-loop will also hit the database popn times. As a general rule, you should try to minimize the amount of queries you use, and you should only select the records you need.
With a few adjustments to your code this can be done in just one query.
There's generally no need to manually specify a primary_key, and in all but some very specific cases it's even better not to define any. Django automatically adds an indexed, auto-incremental primary key field. If you need the card_no field as a unique field, and you need to find rows based on this field, use this:
class Demo(models.Model):
card_no = models.SlugField(max_length=20, unique=True)
...
SlugField automatically adds a database index to the column, essentially making selections by this field as fast as when it is a primary key. This still allows other ways to access the table, e.g. foreign keys (as I'll explain in my next point), to use the (slightly) faster integer field specified by Django, and will ease the use of the model in Django.
If you need to relate an object to an object in another table, use models.ForeignKey. Django gives you a whole set of new functionality that not only makes it easier to use the models, it also makes a lot of queries faster by using JOIN clauses in the SQL query. So for you example:
class Fact_table(models.Model):
card = models.ForeignKey(Demo, related_name='facts')
...
The related_name fields allows you to access all Fact_table objects related to a Demo instance by using instance.facts in Django. (See https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/models/fields/#module-django.db.models.fields.related)
With these two changes, your query (including the loop over the different age_groups) can be changed into a blazing-fast one-hit query giving you the average duration of calls made by each age_group:
age_groups = Demo.objects.values('age_group').annotate(duration_avg=Avg('facts__duration'))
for group in age_groups:
print "Age group: %s - Average duration: %s" % group['age_group'], group['duration_avg']
.values('age_group') selects just the age_group field from the Demo's database table. .annotate(duration_avg=Avg('facts__duration')) takes every unique result from values (thus each unique age_group), and for each unique result will fetch all Fact_table objects related to any Demo object within that age_group, and calculate the average of all the duration fields - all in a single query.

GQL query with "like" operator [duplicate]

Simple one really. In SQL, if I want to search a text field for a couple of characters, I can do:
SELECT blah FROM blah WHERE blah LIKE '%text%'
The documentation for App Engine makes no mention of how to achieve this, but surely it's a common enough problem?
BigTable, which is the database back end for App Engine, will scale to millions of records. Due to this, App Engine will not allow you to do any query that will result in a table scan, as performance would be dreadful for a well populated table.
In other words, every query must use an index. This is why you can only do =, > and < queries. (In fact you can also do != but the API does this using a a combination of > and < queries.) This is also why the development environment monitors all the queries you do and automatically adds any missing indexes to your index.yaml file.
There is no way to index for a LIKE query so it's simply not available.
Have a watch of this Google IO session for a much better and more detailed explanation of this.
i'm facing the same problem, but i found something on google app engine pages:
Tip: Query filters do not have an explicit way to match just part of a string value, but you can fake a prefix match using inequality filters:
db.GqlQuery("SELECT * FROM MyModel WHERE prop >= :1 AND prop < :2",
"abc",
u"abc" + u"\ufffd")
This matches every MyModel entity with a string property prop that begins with the characters abc. The unicode string u"\ufffd" represents the largest possible Unicode character. When the property values are sorted in an index, the values that fall in this range are all of the values that begin with the given prefix.
http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/python/datastore/queriesandindexes.html
maybe this could do the trick ;)
Altough App Engine does not support LIKE queries, have a look at the properties ListProperty and StringListProperty. When an equality test is done on these properties, the test will actually be applied on all list members, e.g., list_property = value tests if the value appears anywhere in the list.
Sometimes this feature might be used as a workaround to the lack of LIKE queries. For instance, it makes it possible to do simple text search, as described on this post.
You need to use search service to perform full text search queries similar to SQL LIKE.
Gaelyk provides domain specific language to perform more user friendly search queries. For example following snippet will find first ten books sorted from the latest ones with title containing fern
and the genre exactly matching thriller:
def documents = search.search {
select all from books
sort desc by published, SearchApiLimits.MINIMUM_DATE_VALUE
where title =~ 'fern'
and genre = 'thriller'
limit 10
}
Like is written as Groovy's match operator =~.
It supports functions such as distance(geopoint(lat, lon), location) as well.
App engine launched a general-purpose full text search service in version 1.7.0 that supports the datastore.
Details in the announcement.
More information on how to use this: https://cloud.google.com/appengine/training/fts_intro/lesson2
Have a look at Objectify here , it is like a Datastore access API. There is a FAQ with this question specifically, here is the answer
How do I do a like query (LIKE "foo%")
You can do something like a startWith, or endWith if you reverse the order when stored and searched. You do a range query with the starting value you want, and a value just above the one you want.
String start = "foo";
... = ofy.query(MyEntity.class).filter("field >=", start).filter("field <", start + "\uFFFD");
Just follow here:
init.py#354">http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/source/browse/trunk/python/google/appengine/ext/search/init.py#354
It works!
class Article(search.SearchableModel):
text = db.TextProperty()
...
article = Article(text=...)
article.save()
To search the full text index, use the SearchableModel.all() method to get an
instance of SearchableModel.Query, which subclasses db.Query. Use its search()
method to provide a search query, in addition to any other filters or sort
orders, e.g.:
query = article.all().search('a search query').filter(...).order(...)
I tested this with GAE Datastore low-level Java API. Me and works perfectly
Query q = new Query(Directorio.class.getSimpleName());
Filter filterNombreGreater = new FilterPredicate("nombre", FilterOperator.GREATER_THAN_OR_EQUAL, query);
Filter filterNombreLess = new FilterPredicate("nombre", FilterOperator.LESS_THAN, query+"\uFFFD");
Filter filterNombre = CompositeFilterOperator.and(filterNombreGreater, filterNombreLess);
q.setFilter(filter);
In general, even though this is an old post, a way to produce a 'LIKE' or 'ILIKE' is to gather all results from a '>=' query, then loop results in python (or Java) for elements containing what you're looking for.
Let's say you want to filter users given a q='luigi'
users = []
qry = self.user_model.query(ndb.OR(self.user_model.name >= q.lower(),self.user_model.email >= q.lower(),self.user_model.username >= q.lower()))
for _qry in qry:
if q.lower() in _qry.name.lower() or q.lower() in _qry.email.lower() or q.lower() in _qry.username.lower():
users.append(_qry)
It is not possible to do a LIKE search on datastore app engine, how ever creating an Arraylist would do the trick if you need to search a word in a string.
#Index
public ArrayList<String> searchName;
and then to search in the index using objectify.
List<Profiles> list1 = ofy().load().type(Profiles.class).filter("searchName =",search).list();
and this will give you a list with all the items that contain the world you did on the search
If the LIKE '%text%' always compares to a word or a few (think permutations) and your data changes slowly (slowly means that it's not prohibitively expensive - both price-wise and performance-wise - to create and updates indexes) then Relation Index Entity (RIE) may be the answer.
Yes, you will have to build additional datastore entity and populate it appropriately. Yes, there are some constraints that you will have to play around (one is 5000 limit on the length of list property in GAE datastore). But the resulting searches are lightning fast.
For details see my RIE with Java and Ojbectify and RIE with Python posts.
"Like" is often uses as a poor-man's substitute for text search. For text search, it is possible to use Whoosh-AppEngine.

Adding a projection to an NHibernate criteria stops it from performing default entity selection

I'm writing an NHibernate criteria that selects data supporting paging. I'm using the COUNT(*) OVER() expression from SQL Server 2005(+) to get hold of the total number of available rows, as suggested by Ayende Rahien. I need that number to be able to calculate how many pages there are in total. The beauty of this solution is that I don't need to execute a second query to get hold of the row count.
However, I can't seem to manage to write a working criteria (Ayende only provides an HQL query).
Here's an SQL query that shows what I want and it works just fine. Note that I intentionally left out the actual paging logic to focus on the problem:
SELECT Items.*, COUNT(*) OVER() AS rowcount
FROM Items
Here's the HQL:
select
item, rowcount()
from
Item item
Note that the rowcount() function is registered in a custom NHibernate dialect and resolves to COUNT(*) OVER() in SQL.
A requirement is that the query is expressed using a criteria. Unfortunately, I don't know how to get it right:
var query = Session
.CreateCriteria<Item>("item")
.SetProjection(
Projections.SqlFunction("rowcount", NHibernateUtil.Int32));
Whenever I add a projection, NHibernate doesn't select item (like it would without a projection), just the rowcount() while I really need both. Also, I can't seem to project item as a whole, only it's properties and I really don't want to list all of them.
I hope someone has a solution to this. Thanks anyway.
I think it is not possible in Criteria, it has some limits.
You could get the id and load items in a subsequent query:
var query = Session
.CreateCriteria<Item>("item")
.SetProjection(Projections.ProjectionList()
.Add(Projections.SqlFunction("rowcount", NHibernateUtil.Int32))
.Add(Projections.Id()));
If you don't like it, use HQL, you can set the maximal number of results there too:
IList<Item> result = Session
.CreateQuery("select item, rowcount() from item where ..." )
.SetMaxResult(100)
.List<Item>();
Use CreateMultiCriteria.
You can execute 2 simple statements with only one hit to the DB that way.
I am wondering why using Criteria is a requirement. Can't you use session.CreateSQLQuery? If you really must do it in one query, I would have suggested pulling back the Item objects and the count, like:
select {item.*}, count(*) over()
from Item {item}
...this way you can get back Item objects from your query, along with the count. If you experience a problem with Hibernate's caching, you can also configure the query spaces (entity/table caches) associated with a native query so that stale query cache entries will be cleared automatically.
If I understand your question properly, I have a solution. I struggled quite a bit with this same problem.
Let me quickly describe the problem I had, to make sure we're on the same page. My problem came down to paging. I want to display 10 records in the UI, but I also want to know the total number of records that matched the filter criteria. I wanted to accomplish this using the NH criteria API, but when adding a projection for row count, my query no longer worked, and I wouldn't get any results (I don't remember the specific error, but it sounds like what you're getting).
Here's my solution (copy & paste from my current production code). Note that "SessionError" is the name of the business entity I'm retrieving paged data for, according to 3 filter criterion: IsDev, IsRead, and IsResolved.
ICriteria crit = CurrentSession.CreateCriteria(typeof (SessionError))
.Add(Restrictions.Eq("WebApp", this));
if (isDev.HasValue)
crit.Add(Restrictions.Eq("IsDev", isDev.Value));
if (isRead.HasValue)
crit.Add(Restrictions.Eq("IsRead", isRead.Value));
if (isResolved.HasValue)
crit.Add(Restrictions.Eq("IsResolved", isResolved.Value));
// Order by most recent
crit.AddOrder(Order.Desc("DateCreated"));
// Copy the ICriteria query to get a row count as well
ICriteria critCount = CriteriaTransformer.Clone(crit)
.SetProjection(Projections.RowCountInt64());
critCount.Orders.Clear();
// NOW add the paging vars to the original query
crit = crit
.SetMaxResults(pageSize)
.SetFirstResult(pageNum_oneBased * pageSize);
// Set up a multi criteria to get your data in a single trip to the database
IMultiCriteria multCrit = CurrentSession.CreateMultiCriteria()
.Add(crit)
.Add(critCount);
// Get the results
IList results = multCrit.List();
List<SessionError> sessionErrors = new List<SessionError>();
foreach (SessionError sessErr in ((IList)results[0]))
sessionErrors.Add(sessErr);
numResults = (long)((IList)results[1])[0];
So I create my base criteria, with optional restrictions. Then I CLONE it, and add a row count projection to the CLONED criteria. Note that I clone it before I add the paging restrictions. Then I set up an IMultiCriteria to contain the original and cloned ICriteria objects, and use the IMultiCriteria to execute both of them. Now I have my paged data from the original ICriteria (and I only dragged the data I need across the wire), and also a raw count of how many actual records matched my criteria (useful for display or creating paging links, or whatever). This strategy has worked well for me. I hope this is helpful.
I would suggest investigating custom result transformer by calling SetResultTransformer() on your session.
Create a formula property in the class mapping:
<property name="TotalRecords" formula="count(*) over()" type="Int32" not-null="true"/>;
IList<...> result = criteria.SetFirstResult(skip).SetMaxResults(take).List<...>();
totalRecords = (result != null && result.Count > 0) ? result[0].TotalRecords : 0;
return result;

Autocomplete Dropdown - too much data, timing out

So, I have an autocomplete dropdown with a list of townships. Initially I just had the 20 or so that we had in the database... but recently, we have noticed that some of our data lies in other counties... even other states. So, the answer to that was buy one of those databases with all towns in the US (yes, I know, geocoding is the answer but due to time constraints we are doing this until we have time for that feature).
So, when we had 20-25 towns the autocomplete worked stellarly... now that there are 80,000 it's not as easy.
As I type I am thinking that the best way to do this is default to this state, then there will be much less. I will add a state selector to the page that defaults to NJ then you can pick another state if need be, this will narrow down the list to < 1000. Though, I may have the same issue? Does anyone know of a work around for an autocomplete with a lot of data?
should I post teh codez of my webservice?
Are you trying to autocomplete after only 1 character is typed? Maybe wait until 2 or more...?
Also, can you just return the top 10 rows, or something?
Sounds like your application is suffocating on the amount of data being returned, and then attempted to be rendered by the browser.
I assume that your database has the proper indexes, and you don't have a performance problem there.
I would limit the results of your service to no more than say 100 results. Users will not look at any more than that any how.
I would also only being retrieving the data from the service once 2 or 3 characters are entered which will further reduce the scope of the query.
Good Luck!
Stupid question maybe, but... have you checked to make sure you have an index on the town name column? I wouldn't think 80K names should be stressing your database...
I think you're on the right track. Use a series of cascading inputs, State -> County -> Township where each succeeding one grabs the potential population based on the value of the preceding one. Each input would validate against its potential population to avoid spurious inputs. I would suggest caching the intermediate results and querying against them for the autocomplete instead of going all the way back to the database each time.
If you have control of the underlying SQL, you may want to try several "UNION" queries instead of one query with several "OR like" lines in its where clause.
Check out this article on optimizing SQL.
I'd just limit the SQL query with a TOP clause. I also like using a "less than" instead of a like:
select top 10 name from cities where #partialname < name order by name;
that "Ce" will give you "Cedar Grove" and "Cedar Knolls" but also "Chatham" & "Cherry Hill" so you always get ten.
In LINQ:
var q = (from c in db.Cities
where partialname < c.Name
orderby c.Name
select c.Name).Take(10);

Resources