I created json schema for MongoDB. It's look like:
{
"schemaType": "Collection",
"name": "Manufacturier",
"defaultValue": "",
"description": "...",
"fields": [
{
"schemaType": "Field",
"name": "_id",
"type": "ObjectId",
"required": true,
"unique": true,
"defaultValue": "",
"description": "...",
"index": 0,
"customProps": []
}
]
}
...
Can I import this schema into mongodb? And how (if it's possible)
This is one of the biggest advantage of mongoDB that you can insert documents without the need to define the schema in advance , afcourse there is option to add schema validation rules as commented by #Alex Blex , but this is limiting the main reason you would like to use noSQL mongoDB database instead of other possible data storage system ...
Related
We are using Loopback successfully so far, but we want to add query params to our API documentation.
In our swagger.json file, we might have something that looks like =>
{
"swagger": "2.0",
"info": {
"version": "1.0.0",
"title": "poc-discovery"
},
"basePath": "/api",
"paths": {
"/Users/{id}/accessTokens/{fk}": {
"get": {
"tags": [
"User"
],
"summary": "Find a related item by id for accessTokens.",
"operationId": "User.prototype.__findById__accessTokens",
"parameters": [
{
"name": "fk",
"in": "path",
"description": "Foreign key for accessTokens",
"required": true,
"type": "string",
"format": "JSON"
},
{
"name": "id",
"in": "path",
"description": "User id",
"required": true,
"type": "string",
"format": "JSON"
},
{
"name":"searchText",
"in":"query",
"description":"The Product that needs to be fetched",
"required":true,
"type":"string"
},
{
"name":"ctrCode",
"in":"query",
"description":"The Product locale needs to be fetched. Example=en-GB, fr-FR, etc.",
"required":true,
"type":"string"
},
],
I am 99% certain the swagger.json information gets generated dynamically via information from the .json files in the /server/models directory.
I am hoping that I can add the query params that we accept for each model in those .json files. What I want to avoid is having to modify swagger.json directly.
What is the best approach to add our query params so that they show up in our docs? Very confused as to how to best approach this.
After a few hours of tinkering, I'm afraid there is not a straight forward way to achieve this as the swagger spec generated here is representation of remoting metadata for model methods along with Model data from model.json files.
Thus, updating remoting metadata for built-in model methods would be challenging and it might not be fully supported by method implementations.
Right approach, IMO, here is to:
- create a remoteMethod wrapper around built-in method for which you want additional params to be injected with requried http mapping data.
- And, disable the REST end-point for the built-in method using
MyModel.disableRemoteMethod(<methodName>, <isStatic>).
I have an sample json:
{
"type": "persons",
"id": 2,
"attributes": {
"first": "something",
"second": "something else"
}
}
And I have to make a schema for it (using JSON API specs and JSON schema docs):
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"type": {
"type": "string",
"pattern": "^persons$"
},
"id": {
"type": "integer"
},
"attributes": {
"type": "object",
"properties": {...}
}
},
"required": ["type", "id", "attributes"]
}
And the question is: if the only acceptable value for "type" is "persons", should I use in schema pattern (like above) or enum like
"enum": ["persons"]
I couldn't get any clear answer from documentation, although in examples in specs enums are used for single values. So what's your opinion?
Ultimately, it doesn't really matter. Both will work and both are reasonable. That said, the most common approach I've seen is to use enum. Neither are perfect for readability, but I think enum is better for two reasons.
Using pattern requires two lines to express. Using enum requires only one because type is implied by the value in the array. Two lines are harder to read than one, so if that line is expressive enough, I say stick with one.
Not everyone is comfortable reading regex. enum might be more accessible for that reason.
Since draft-6 there is a new keyword called const for this use-case.
"type": {
"type": "string",
"const": "persons"
},
http://json-schema.org/latest/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.6.1.3
I'm aware of this question but I don't believe that there is no solution with standars component. I'm using Talend ESB Studio 5.4.
I have to parse a JSON string from a REST web service into multiple output, and add them to a database.
Database has two tables:
User (user_id, name, card, card_id, points)
Action (user_id, action_id, description, used_point)
My JSON Structure is something like that:
{
"users": [
{
"name": "foo",
"user_id": 1,
"card": {
"card_id": "AAA",
"points": 10
},
"actions": [
{
"action_id": 1,
"description": "buy",
"used_points": 2
},
{
"action_id": 3,
"description": "buy",
"used_points": 1
}
]
},
{
"name": "bar",
"user_id": 2,
"card": {
"card_id": "BBB",
"points": -1
},
"actions": [
{
"id": 2,
"description": "sell",
"used_point": 5
}
]
}
]
}
I have tried to add a JSON Schema Metadata but it is not clear to me how to "flat" the JSON. I have tried to look at tXMLMap, tExtractJSONFields.. but no luck till now.
I also had a look at tJavaRow but I don't understand how to make a Schema for that.
It's a pity because till now I'm loving Talend! Any advice?
You can save a json file in your disk, then create new json file in the metadata of Talend studio, the wizard retrieve the schema for you, after saving, you ca, copie schema in the generic schema of the metadata, and it's done, use that generic schema where you want, this is how to use generic schema in the tRestClient component:
I am starting to implement a REST layer to an existing JSF-webapp (using RESTEasy, with a Jettison provider). Since tutorials for Java REST layers are quite basic (simple objects) I am facing the question how existing JPA entity relations can be easily exposed to/consumed from the client. A simple "/user" REST-method already gives me successfully the output below, which is a good start. But my main question is - how to deal with this kind of structures. Is it common to use such structures through REST?
I don't want to expose all details or the whole entity-tree, wether it is because of irrelevance, saving traffic or security issues. Using #XmlTransient works fine for the #Procudes, but merging these entities on a #POST/#PUT all #XmlTransient properties are merged to NULL. What is right way of doing that?
Since #XMLTransient is a global and permanent setting - what is the right approach to dynamically decide which depth of entity-tree I want to expose?
thanks
Example JSON of User-entity:
{
"user": {
"id": ..,
"uuid": "1521ccad69ba4579bbe49e75181fefc1",
"image": "",
"contact": {
"id": ..,
"uuid": "8eb429dcca994834ae5c8cf07cba62a2",
"cellphone": "",
"city": "",
"country": "",
"email": "mail#foo.bar",
"fax": "",
"phone": 555,
...
},
"name": "...",
"account": {
"id": ...,
"uuid": "80b331f9e6644449bb3600b0e5145253",
"confirmed": true,
"profile": {
"id": ...,
"uuid": "e172bdcafe2645d7975852ca5685c98c",
"locale": "en",
"notifyMessage": false,
"notifyNews": true,
"notifyTask": true,
"timeZone": "Europe/Berlin"
},
"roleProfiles": {
"id": ..,
"uuid": "f1713758f3f2416faed3e68350f2d759",
"active": true,
"assemblies": [
{
"id": ..,
"uuid": "13d72449833a4eb0b5b4f62c729ee44f",
"image": "",
"commercialRegisters": [
123,
456
],
"contact": {
"id": ...,
"uuid": "bef3802297344e3c8c3619b6c91c345a",
"city": "",
"country": "",
...
},
"thumbnail": ""
},
{
...
}
],
},
"userName": "..."
},
"displayName": "...",
"firstName": "Foo",
"lastName": "Bar",
"salutation": "",
"title": ""
}
}
Hi references in your Java classes should be serialized to JSON as links and not as values.
This is how Spring REST does it.
The good thing is : That way you have a kind of lazy loading
The bad thing is that the client needs additional requests to get the values of the references.
I developed a complete solution for that, but that was a hard piece of work.
The client (in javascript) creates proxies for those references and resolves them on demand.
I have a demo of that at demo.appdriver.com
In the upper right corner you see a link 'REST API' click it and you can see the REST API of a rather complex domain model.
Now you can start to click on the user interface , create, change, delete etc.
and have a look at the traffic between client and server.
Hope it helps !
In the app we're developing, we create all the JSON at the server side using dinamically generated configs (JSON objects). We use that for stores (and other stuff, like GUIs), with a dinamically generated list of its data fields.
With a JSON like this:
{
"proxy": {
"type": "rest",
"url": "/feature/163",
"timeout": 600000
},
"baseParams": {
"node": "163"
},
"fields": [{"name": "id", "type": "int" },
{"name": "iconCls", "type": "auto"},
{"name": "text","type": "string"
},{ "name": "name", "type": "auto"}
],
"xtype": "jsonstore",
"autoLoad": true,
"autoDestroy": true
}, ...
Ext will gently create an "implicit model" with which I'll be able to work with, load it on forms, save it, delete it, etc.
What I want is to specify through a JSON config not the fields, but the model itself. Is this possible?
Something like:
{
model: {
name: 'MiClass',
extends: 'Ext.data.Model',
"proxy": {
"type": "rest",
"url": "/feature/163",
"timeout": 600000},
etc... }
"autoLoad": true,
"autoDestroy": true
}, ...
That way I would be able to create a whole JSON from the server without having to glue stuff using JS statements on the client side.
Best regards,
I don't see why not. The syntax to create a model class is similar to that of store and components:
Ext.define('MyApp.model.MyClass', {
extend:'Ext.data.Model',
fields:[..]
});
So if you take this apart you could call Ext.define(className,config);
where className is a string and config is a JSON object and both are generated on the server.
There's no way to achieve what I want.
The only way you can do it is by means of defining the fields of the Ext.data.Store and have it to generate the implicit model by using the fields configuration.