collections - How to tag documents in MongoDB? -


i need tag documents in collection, let's call 'contacts'.

the first idea had create attribute called "tags" each document. well, in case have like:

{ _id:'1', contact_name:'asya kamsky', tags:['mongodb', 'maths', 'travels'] }

now, let's suppose have users want tag document in 'contacts'.

if keep decision save tags attribute each document, tags personal, need use userid each tag. our document (or not):

{ _id:'1', contact_name:'asya kamsky', tags:[ {userid:'alex',tags:['mongodb', 'maths', 'travels']}, {userid:'eric',tags:['databases', 'friends', 'japan']}, ] }

now, let's complicate bit. let's imagine have lot of users , each 1 want tag documents personal tags.

how deal that?

ok, create thousands of tags each document:

{ _id:'1', contact_name:'asya kamsky', tags:[ {userid:'alex',tags:['mongodb', 'maths', 'travels']}, {userid:'eric',tags:['databases', 'friends', 'japan']}, {.....................................................} {.....................................................} {......................................................} ] }

but, if have millions of users? in case have 16mg limitation each document, know....

at point, worrying future growth of application, decided create nice separated collection called 'tags' contain documents similar to:

{     "contact_name" : "asya kamsky",     "useriid" : "alex",     "tags" : ['mongodb', 'maths', 'travels'],     "timestamp" : "2017-08-08 14:33:28" },  {     "contact_name" : "asya kamsky",     "useriid" : "eric",     "tags" : ['databases', 'friends', 'japan'],     "timestamp" : "2017-08-08 14:33:28" }

that's, have separated documents represent tag of each user.

cool , clean, right?

well, case, face 2 problems:

  1. minor problem: return sql logic don't anymore accept in cases.
  2. big (for me) problem: how search contact personal tags? in case have nice 'join' problem mongodb resolves using $lookup. "resolves well" 10000, 20000, or 500000 documents. want ensure performance in future, think 10000000 contacts. so, researched recently, $lookup works "small part" of universe and, indexes, search take lot of time executed.

how resolve challenge?

thanks all

if usage such number of users x number/size of tags per contact (plus whatever other data in contacts document) bring near 16mb document size limit storing tags ins separate collection seems valid. before go down route sure likely? have tried creating contact documents in bid see how many tags, how many users per contact near 16mb limit. if answer implies number of users and/or tags unlikely ever reach maybe concerns strictly theoretical , consider sticking simplest solution embed user specific tags inside contacts.

the rest of answer assumes size estimates , knowledge number of tags , users per contact such size constraints valid. on basis, stated specific concern join performance ...

but want ensure performance in future, think 10000000 contacts. so, researched recently, $lookup works "small part" of universe and, indexes, search take lot of time executed.

have tried measuring performance? generate seed documents contacts , tags , persist variations of these , run queries using $lookup , measure performance. few benchmarks, example:

  • 1,000 contacts , 10,000 tags
  • 100,000 contacts , 1,000,000 tags
  • 1,000,000 contacts , 10,000,000 tags
  • 10,000,000 contacts , 100,000,000 tags

when running benchmark tests can additionally use explain() understand what's going on inside mongodb.

you might find performance acceptable, can know since understand expectations users of system have respect performance.

one last point, if use case here given user wants find of contacts , tags could handled 'client side join' i.e. 2 queries (1) tags "userid" : "..." , (2) find contacts referenced tags. depending on use cases are, could more performant server side join (aka $lookup).


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

android - InAppBilling registering BroadcastReceiver in AndroidManifest -

i'm implementing inapp billing in android app. works well, however, i'm trying decouple broadcast receiver activity manifest. suggestion in android's trivialdrive sample: // important: dynamically register broadcast messages updated purchases. // register receiver here instead of <receiver> in manifest // because call getpurchases() @ startup, therefore can ignore // broadcasts sent while app isn't running. // note: registering listener in activity bad idea, done here // because sample. regardless, receiver must registered after // iabhelper setup, before first call getpurchases(). currently there's class extends broadcastreceiver : public class iabbroadcastreceiver extends broadcastreceiver { /** * intent action receiver should filter for. */ public static final string action = "com.android.vending.billing.purchases_updated"; private final iabbroadcastlistener mlistener; public iabbroadcastreceiver(iabbroadcastlistener listener) { m...
Read more

python Tkinter Capturing keyboard events save as one single string -

is possible store keyboard events 1 string? code below stores 1 char , prints it. card reader or bar code reader, contains collection of character/ string not 1 character @ time. goal save char pressed text variable. from tkinter import * root = tk() def key(event): text= event.char text+= event.char print ("pressed", text) def callback(event): frame.focus_set() print ("clicked at", event.x, event.y) frame = frame(root, width=100, height=100) frame.bind("<key>", key) frame.bind("<button-1>", callback) frame.pack() root.mainloop() currently, creating text variable , everytime key() function gets called, , text stores last character typed. you can define text module level variable , , use module level text inside key function - text = '' def key(event): global text text+= event.char print("pressed", text)
Read more

sql server - Why does Linq-to-SQL add unnecessary COUNT()? -

here tables: create table customer ( cid int primary key, name varchar(32) ) create table ord ( oid int primary key, cid int foreign key references customer, address varchar(20) ) here's linq-to-sql statement: var aaa = c in db.customer select new { c, o = c.ord.tolist() }; and here's inexplicable query generated linq-to-sql: select [t0].[cid] [cid], [t0].[name] [name], [t1].[oid] [oid], [t1].[cid] [cid2], [t1].[address] [address], (select count(*) [dbo].[ord] [t2] [t2].[cid] = [t0].[cid]) [value] [dbo].[customer] [t0] left outer join [dbo].[ord] [t1] on [t1].[cid] = [t0].[cid] order [t0].[cid], [t1].[oid] i want understand how rid of count(*) part. it's entirely uncalled for! linq needs count(*) in order determine number of entries returned o = c.ord.tolist() .
Read more