This page collects code snippets to be used in your Views. They are mainly meant to help get your head around the map/reduce approach to accessing database content. Keep in mind that the the Futon web client silently adds group=true to your views.
Common mistakes
When creating a reduce function, a re-reduce should behave in the same way as the regular reduce. The reason is that CouchDB doesn't necessarily call re-reduce on your map results.
Think about it this way: If you have a bunch of values V1 V2 V3 for key K, then you can get the combined result either by calling reduce([K,K,K],[V1,V2,V3],0) or by re-reducing the individual results: reduce(null,[R1,R2,R3],1). This depends on what your view results look like internally.
Get docs with a particular user id
map: function(doc) { if (doc.user_id) { emit(doc.user_id, null); } }
Then query with key=USER_ID to get all the rows that match that user.
Get all documents which have an attachment
This lists only the documents which have an attachment.
map: function(doc) { if (doc._attachments) { emit(doc._id, null); } }
In SQL this would be something like SELECT id FROM table WHERE attachment IS NOT NULL.
Count documents with and without an attachment
Call this with group=true or you only get the combined number of documents with and without attachments.
map: function(doc) { if (doc._attachments) { emit("with attachment", 1); } else { emit("without attachment", 1); } } reduce: function(keys, values) { return sum(values); }
Using curl you can call it like this:
curl -s -i -X POST -H 'Content-Type: application/json' -d '{"map": "function(doc){if(doc._attachments) {emit(\"with\",1);} else {emit(\"without\",1);}}", "reduce": "function(keys, values) {return sum(values);}"}' 'http://localhost:5984/somedb/_temp_view?group=true'
In SQL this would be something along the lines of SELECT num_attachments FROM table GROUP BY num_attachments (but this would give extra output for rows containing more than one attachment).
Generating a list of unique values
Here we use the fact that the key for a view result can be an array. Suppose you have a map that generates (key, value) pairs with many duplicates and you want to remove the duplicates. To do so, use ([key, value], null) as the map output.
Call this with group=true or you only get null.
map: function(doc) { for (var i in doc.links) emit([doc.parent, i], null); } } reduce: function(keys, values) { return null; }
This will give you results like
{"rows":[ {"key":["thisparent","thatlink"],"value":null}, {"key":["thisparent","thatotherlink"],"value":null} ]}
You can then get all the rows for the key "thisparent" with the view parameters startkey=["thisparent"]&endkey=["thisparent",{}]&inclusive_end=false
Note that the trick here is using the key for what you want to make unique. You can combine this with the counting above to get a count of duplicate values:
map: function(doc) { for (var i in doc.links) emit([doc.parent, i], 1); } } reduce: function(keys, values) { return sum(values); }
If you then want to know the total count for each parent, you can use the group_level view parameter: startkey=["thisparent"]&endkey=["thisparent",{}]&inclusive_end=false&group_level=1
Retrieve the top N tags.
This snippet assumes your docs have a top level tags element that is an array of strings, theoretically it'd work with an array of anything, but it hasn't been tested as such.
Use a standard counting emit function:
function(doc) { for(var idx in doc.tags) { emit(doc.tags[idx], 1); } }
Notice that MAX is the number of tags to return. Technically this snippet relies on an implementation artifact that CouchDB will send keys in sorted order to the reduce functions, thus it'd break subtly if this stopped being true. Buyer beware!
function(keys, values, rereduce) { var MAX = 3; /* Basically we're just kind of faking a priority queue. We do have one caveat in that we may process a single key across reduce calls. I'm reasonably certain that even so we'll still be processing keys in collation order in which case we can just keep the last key from the previous non-rereduce in our return value. Should work itself out in the rereduces though when we don't keep the extras around. */ var tags = {}; var lastkey = null; if(!rereduce) { /* I could probably alter the view output to produce a slightly different output so that this code could get pushed into the same code as below, but I figure that the view output might be used for other reduce functions. This just creates an object {tag1: N, tag2: M, ...} */ for(var k in keys) { if(tags[keys[k][0]]) tags[keys[k][0]] += values[k]; else tags[keys[k][0]] = values[k]; } lastkey = keys[keys.length-1][0]; } else { /* This just takes a collection of objects that have (tag, count) key/value pairs and merges into a single object. */ tags = values[0]; for(var v = 1; v < values.length; v++) { for(var t in values[v]) { if(tags[t]) tags[t] += values[v][t]; else tags[t] = values[v][t]; } } } /* This code just removes the tags that are out of the top N tags. When re-reduce is false we may keep the last key passed to use because its possible that we only processed part of it's data. */ var top = []; for(var t in tags){top[top.length] = [t, tags[t]];} function sort_tags(a, b) {return b[1] - a[1];} top.sort(sort_tags); for(var n = MAX; n < top.length; n++) { if(top[n][0] != lastkey) tags[top[n][0]] = undefined; } // And done. return tags; }
There's probably a more efficient method to get the priority queue stuff, but I was going for simplicity over speed.
When querying this reduce you should not use the group or group_level query string parameters. The returned reduce value will be an object with the top MAX tag: count pairs.
Joining an aggregate sum along with related data
Here is a modified example from the View collation page. Note that group_level needs to be set to 1 for it to return a meaningful customer_details.
// Map function function(doc) { if (doc.Type == "customer") { emit([doc._id, 0], doc); } else if (doc.Type == "order") { emit([doc.customer_id, 1], doc); } } // Reduce function // Only produces meaningful output.customer_details if group_level >= 1 function(keys, values, rereduce) { var output = {}; if (rereduce) { for (idx in values) { if (values[idx].total !== undefined) { output.total += values[idx].total; } else if (values[idx].customer_details !== undefined) { output.customer_details = values[idx].customer_details; } } } else { for (idx in values) { if (values[idx].Type == "customer") output.customer_details = doc; else if (values[idx].Type == "order") output.total += 1; } } return output; }
Computing simple summary statistics (min,max,mean,standard deviation)
Implementation in JavaScript by MarcaJames. Mistakes in coding are my fault, algorithms are from others, as noted. To the best of my knowledge the algorithms are public domain, and my implementation freely available to all (Perl Artistic License if you really need a license to consult)
Here is some code I have developed to compute standard deviation. I do it two ways, both of which are different from jchris' github version (add link?). In practice of course you wouldn't need both ways. The view is specialized to my dataset, but the reduce function might be useful to others.
I've only ever tested it on futon, and have no idea what the "group" parameter does to the output. Probably nothing!
// Map function function(doc) { var risk_exponent = -3.194 + doc.CV_VOLOCC_1 *1.080 + doc.CV_VOLOCC_M *0.627 + doc.CV_VOLOCC_R *0.553 + doc.CORR_VOLOCC_1M *1.439 + doc.CORR_VOLOCC_MR *0.658 + doc.LAG1_OCC_M *0.412 + doc.LAG1_OCC_R *1.424 + doc.MU_VOL_1 *0.038 + doc.MU_VOL_M *0.100 + doc["CORR_OCC_1M X MU_VOL_M"] *-0.168 + doc["CORR_OCC_1M X SD_VOL_R" ] *0.479 + doc["CORR_OCC_1M X LAG1_OCC_R"] *-1.462 ; var risk = Math.exp(risk_exponent); // parse the date and "chunk" it up var pattern = new RegExp("(.*)-0?(.*)-0?(.*)T0?(.*):0?(.*):0?(.*)(-0800)"); var result = pattern.exec(doc.EstimateTime); var day; if(result){ //new Date(year, month, day, hours, minutes, seconds, ms) // force rounding to 5 minutes, 0 seconds, for aggregation of 5 minute chunks var fivemin = 5 * Math.floor(result[5]/5) day = new Date(result[1],result[2]-1,result[3],result[4], fivemin, 0); } var weekdays = ["Sun","Mon","Tue","Wed","Thu","Fri","Sat"]; emit([weekdays[day.getDay()],day.toLocaleTimeString( )],{'risk':risk}); } // Reduce function function (keys, values, rereduce) { // algorithm for on-line computation of moments from // // Tony F. Chan, Gene H. Golub, and Randall J. LeVeque: "Updating // Formulae and a Pairwise Algorithm for Computing Sample // Variances." Technical Report STAN-CS-79-773, Department of // Computer Science, Stanford University, November 1979. url: // ftp://reports.stanford.edu/pub/cstr/reports/cs/tr/79/773/CS-TR-79-773.pdf // so there is some weirdness in that the original was Fortran, index from 1, // and lots of arrays (no lists, no hash tables) // also consulted http://people.xiph.org/~tterribe/notes/homs.html // and http://www.jstor.org/stable/2683386 // and (ick!) the wikipedia description of Knuth's algorithm // to clarify what was going on with http://www.slamb.org/svn/repos/trunk/projects/common/src/java/org/slamb/common/stats/Sample.java /* combine the variance esitmates for two partitions, A and B. partitionA and partitionB both should contain { S : the current estimate of the second moment Sum : the sum of observed values M : the number of observations used in the partition to calculate S and Sum } The output will be an identical object, containing the S, Sum and M for the combination of partitions A and B This routine is derived from original fortran code in Chan et al, (1979) But it is easily derived by recognizing that all you're doing is multiplying each partition's S and Sum by its respective count M, and then dividing by the new count Ma + Mb. The arrangement of the diff etc is just rearranging terms to make it look nice. And then summing up the sums, and summing up the counts */ function combine_S(partitionA,partitionB){ var NewS=partitionA.S; var NewSum=partitionA.Sum; var min = partitionA.min; var max = partitionA.max; var M = partitionB.M; if(!M){M=0;} if(M){ var diff = ((partitionA.M * partitionB.Sum / partitionB.M) - partitionA.Sum ); NewS += partitionB.S + partitionB.M*diff*diff/(partitionA.M * (partitionA.M+partitionB.M) ); NewSum += partitionB.Sum ; min = Math.min(partitionB.min, min); max = Math.max(partitionB.max, max); } return {'S':NewS,'Sum':NewSum, 'M': partitionA.M+M, 'min':min, 'max':max }; } /* This routine is derived from original fortran code in Chan et al, (1979), with the combination step split out above to allow that to be called independently in the rereduce step. Arguments: The first argument (values) is an array of objects. The assumption is that the key to the variable of interest is 'risk'. If this is not the case, the seventh argument should be the correct key to use. More complicated data structures are not supported. The second, third, and fourth arguments are in case this is a running tally. You can pass in exiting values for M (the number of observations already processed), Sum (the running sum of those M observations) and S (the current estimate of variance for those M observations). Totally optional, defaulting to zero. The fifth parameter is for the running min, and the sixth for the max. Pass "null" for parameters 2 through 6 if you need to pass a key in the seventh slot. Some notes on the algorithm. There is a precious bit of trickery with stack pointers, etc that make for a minimal amount of temporary storage. All this was included in the original algorithm. I can't see that it makes much sense to include all that effort given that I've got gobs of RAM and am instead most likely processor bound, but it reminded me of programming in assembly so I kept it in. If you watch the progress of this algorithm in a debugger or firebug, you'll see that the size of the stack stays pretty small, with the bottom (0) entry staying at zero, then the [1] entry containing a power of two (2,4,8,16, etc), and the [2] entry containing the next power of two down from [1] and so on. As the slots of the stack get filled up, they get cascaded together by the inner loop. You could skip all that, and just pairwise process repeatedly until the list of intermediate values is empty, but whatever. And there seems to be some super small gain in efficiency in using identical support for two groups being combined, in that you don't have to consider different Ma and Mb in the computation. One less divide I guess) */ function pairwise_update (values, M, Sum, S, min, max, key){ if(!key){key='risk';} if(!Sum){Sum = 0; S = 0; M=0;} if(!S){Sum = 0; S = 0; M=0;} if(!M){Sum = 0; S = 0; M=0;} if(!min){ min = Infinity; } if(!max){ max = -Infinity; } var T; var stack_ptr=1; var N = values.length; var half = Math.floor(N/2); var NewSum; var NewS ; var SumA=[]; var SA=[]; var Terms=[]; Terms[0]=0; if(N == 1){ Nsum=values[0][key]; Ns=0; }else if(N > 1){ // loop over the data pairwise for(var i = 0; i < half; i++){ // check min max if(values[2*i+1][key] < values[2*i][key] ){ min = Math.min(values[2*i+1][key], min); max = Math.max(values[2*i][key], max); }else{ min = Math.min(values[2*i][key], min); max = Math.max(values[2*i+1][key], max); } SumA[stack_ptr]=values[2*i+1][key] + values[2*i][key]; var diff = values[2*i + 1][key] - values[2*i][key] ; SA[stack_ptr]=( diff * diff ) / 2; Terms[stack_ptr]=2; while( Terms[stack_ptr] == Terms[stack_ptr-1]){ // combine the top two elements in storage, as // they have equal numbers of support terms. this // should happen for powers of two (2, 4, 8, etc). // Everything else gets cleaned up below stack_ptr--; Terms[stack_ptr]*=2; // compare this diff with the below diff. Here // there is no multiplication and division of the // first sum (SumA[stack_ptr]) because it is the // same size as the other. var diff = SumA[stack_ptr] - SumA[stack_ptr+1]; SA[stack_ptr]= SA[stack_ptr] + SA[stack_ptr+1] + (diff * diff)/Terms[stack_ptr]; SumA[stack_ptr] += SumA[stack_ptr+1]; } // repeat as needed stack_ptr++; } stack_ptr--; // check if N is odd if(N % 2 != 0){ // handle that dangling entry stack_ptr++; Terms[stack_ptr]=1; SumA[stack_ptr]=values[N-1][key]; SA[stack_ptr]=0; // the variance of a single observation is zero! min = Math.min(values[N-1][key], min); max = Math.max(values[N-1][key], max); } T=Terms[stack_ptr]; NewSum=SumA[stack_ptr]; NewS= SA[stack_ptr]; if(stack_ptr > 1){ // values.length is not power of two, so not // everything has been scooped up in the inner loop // above. Here handle the remainders for(var i = stack_ptr-1; i>=1 ; i--){ // compare this diff with the above diff---one // more multiply and divide on the current sum, // because the size of the sets (SumA[i] and NewSum) // are different. var diff = Terms[i]*NewSum/T-SumA[i]; NewS = NewS + SA[i] + ( T * diff * diff )/ (Terms[i] * (Terms[i] + T)); NewSum += SumA[i]; T += Terms[i]; } } } // finally, combine NewS and NewSum with S and Sum return combine_S( {'S':NewS,'Sum':NewSum, 'M': T , 'min':min, 'max':max}, {'S':S,'Sum':Sum, 'M': M , 'min':min, 'max':max}); } /* This function is attributed to Knuth, the Art of Computer Programming. Donald Knuth is a math god, so I am sure that it is numerically stable, but I haven't read the source so who knows. The first parameter is again values, a list of objects with the expectation that the variable of interest is contained under the key 'risk'. If this is not the case, pass the correct variable in the 7th field. Parameters 2 through 6 are all optional. Pass nulls if you need to pass a key in slot 7. In order they are mean: the current mean value estimate M2: the current estimate of the second moment (variance) n: the count of observations used in the current estimate min: the current min value observed max: the current max value observed */ function KnuthianOnLineVariance(values, M2, n, mean, min, max, key){ if(!M2){ M2 = 0; } if(!n){ n = 0; } if(!mean){ mean = 0; } if(!min){ min = Infinity; } if(!max){ max = -Infinity; } if(!key){ key = 'risk'; } // this algorithm is apparently a special case of the above // pairwise algorithm, in which you just apply one more value // to the running total. I don't know why bun Chan et al // (1979) and again in their later paper claim that using M // greater than 1 is always better than not. // but this code is certainly cleaner! code based on Scott // Lamb's Java found at // http://www.slamb.org/svn/repos/trunk/projects/common/src/java/org/slamb/common/stats/Sample.java // but modified a bit for(var i=0; i<values.length; i++ ){ var diff = (values[i][key] - mean); var newmean = mean + diff / (n+i+1); M2 += diff * (values[i][key] - newmean); mean = newmean; min = Math.min(values[i][key], min); max = Math.max(values[i][key], max); } return {'M2': M2, 'n': n + values.length, 'mean': mean, 'min':min, 'max':max }; } function KnuthCombine(partitionA,partitionB){ if(partitionB.n){ var newn = partitionA.n + partitionB.n; var diff = partitionB.mean - partitionA.mean; var newmean = partitionA.mean + diff*(partitionB.n/newn) var M2 = partitionA.M2 + partitionB.M2 + (diff * diff * partitionA.n * partitionB.n / newn ); min = Math.min(partitionB.min, partitionA.min); max = Math.max(partitionB.max, partitionA.max); return {'M2': M2, 'n': newn, 'mean': newmean, 'min':min, 'max':max }; } else { return partitionA; } } var output={}; var knuthOutput={}; // two cases in the application of reduce. In the first reduce // case the rereduce flag is false, and we have raw values. We // also have keys, but that isn't applicable here. // // In the rereduce case, rereduce is true, and we are being passed // output for identical keys that needs to be combined further. if(!rereduce) { output = pairwise_update(values); output.variance_n=output.S/output.M; output.mean = output.Sum/output.M; knuthOutput = KnuthianOnLineVariance(values); knuthOutput.variance_n=knuthOutput.M2/knuthOutput.n; output.knuthOutput=knuthOutput; } else { /* we have an existing pass, so should have multiple outputs to combine */ for(var v in values){ output = combine_S(values[v],output); knuthOutput = KnuthCombine(values[v].knuthOutput, knuthOutput); } output.variance_n=output.S/output.M; output.mean = output.Sum/output.M; knuthOutput.variance_n=knuthOutput.M2/knuthOutput.n; output.knuthOutput=knuthOutput; } // and done return output; }
Sample output. Note the difference in the very last few decimal places between the two methods.
["Tue", "08:00:00"] |
{"S": 1276.8988123975391, "Sum": 1257.4497350063903, "M": 955, "min": 0.033031734767263086, "max": 6.011336961717487, "variance_n": 1.3370668192644388, "mean": 1.3167012932004087, "knuthOutput": {"M2": 1276.898812397539, "n": 955, "mean": 1.3167012932004083, "min": 0.033031734767263086, "max": 6.011336961717487, "variance_n": 1.3370668192644386}} |
["Tue", "08:05:00"] |
{"S": 1363.1444727834003, "Sum": 1303.08214106713, "M": 939, "min": 0.03216066554751794, "max": 5.93544645899576, "variance_n": 1.4516980540824285, "mean": 1.387733909549659, "knuthOutput": {"M2": 1363.1444727834005, "n": 939, "mean": 1.3877339095496595, "min": 0.03216066554751794, "max": 5.93544645899576, "variance_n": 1.4516980540824287}} |
Interactive CouchDB Tutorial
See this blog post, which is a CouchDB emulator (in JavaScript) that explains the basics of map/reduce, view collation and querying CouchDB RESTfully.