You would need a view... As I described earlier.... But BE SURE TO store the UTC milliseconds on the doc...what...or use the getTime() function to emit [ seconds, group]... And then your reduce would be _count.... Lastly you will need to write a list function that aggregates over your results on last time to get your desired output On Oct 5, 2014 12:33 AM, "Boaz Citrin" <[email protected]> wrote:
> how could I solve it if let's say it would be limited to the second? > > On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Stanley Iriele <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Or can it be down to say....the hour... Or minute... Something like that > > On Oct 4, 2014 11:53 PM, "Boaz Citrin" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I need to filter by date and group by group... > > > > > > For example having these docs: > > > { > > > "group" : "a", > > > "associated" : "2014-10-04T21:58:59.377Z", > > > ... > > > } > > > { > > > "group" : "a", > > > "associated" : "2014-10-03T21:58:59.377Z", > > > ... > > > } > > > { > > > "group" : "b", > > > "associated" : "2014-10-04T21:58:59.377Z", > > > ... > > > } > > > { > > > "group" : "b", > > > "associated" : "2014-10-01T21:58:59.377Z", > > > ... > > > } > > > > > > I want to support a query with from-date = "2014-10-02T21:58:59.377Z" > > > to-date= "2014-10-04T22:58:59.377Z" > > > > > > And the result will be - > > > > > > a, 2 > > > b, 1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Stanley Iriele <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Right ...are you saying... That you need grouping down to the day?... > > In > > > > which case you can just emit[ date, group]... The fate being the > > > > milliseconds truncated to the day and just have a reduce that's > > > _count.... > > > > By the way the date can also be broken down to [year, month, day, > > group] > > > > > > > > You would need to change the group_level to 4 instead of 2 bit the > view > > > > would be human readable. > > > > > > > > The truck here is that you query with start key ,end_key to get the > the > > > > days and re reduce those values again for that arbitrary date range > in > > a > > > > reduce function and you should be good > > > > On Oct 4, 2014 11:23 PM, "Boaz Citrin" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I need to get the count of document that were associated to a group > > > > between > > > > > two given dates. Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Stanley Iriele < > [email protected] > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hey what date are you looking to filter to? Day/ month..year? > > > > > > On Oct 4, 2014 10:11 PM, "Boaz Citrin" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Giovanni, > > > > > > > You say I can get all the groups at the same time, > > > > > > > but how can I achieve this and also filter by date? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Giovanni P <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can use the second with group_level=1 and get all the > > groups > > > at > > > > > the > > > > > > > > same time. > > > > > > > > And you can use _count instead of _sum, so you don't even > need > > to > > > > > emit > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > value, just the key. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Boaz Citrin < > [email protected] > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My documents contain two fields to maintain group > > associations, > > > > say > > > > > > > > "group" > > > > > > > > > holds the group document id, and "associated" holds the > date > > > this > > > > > > > > document > > > > > > > > > was added to the group. > > > > > > > > > Now I want to be able to know how many documents were added > > to > > > a > > > > > > given > > > > > > > > > group[s] between two given dates. > > > > > > > > > The challenge is that to be able to filter by dates, I need > > to > > > > have > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > date as the key first part. > > > > > > > > > But I also need the group as the first key part in order to > > > > > aggregate > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > number of group associations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see two options here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. > > > > > > > > > Map: associated, {"group": group} > > > > > > > > > Reduce: a function that aggregates all values by group, > > which I > > > > > > assume > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > fine as I know the number of groups is relatively small. > > > > > > > > > (plus configuring reduce_limit=false ...) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. > > > > > > > > > Map: [group,associated], 1 > > > > > > > > > Reduce: sum(values) > > > > > > > > > Here I cannot retrieve multiple groups at once, so I use a > > > > request > > > > > > per > > > > > > > > > desired group. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tried the two approaches, with the first one gives faster > > > > response. > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > leads me to two questions: > > > > > > > > > 1. Is there any risk in a reduce function that produces a > > > > > potentially > > > > > > > > long > > > > > > > > > string? > > > > > > > > > 2. Is there a better way to achieve what I do here? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Boaz > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
