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" <bcit...@gmail.com> 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 <siriele...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hey what date are you looking to filter to? Day/ month..year?
> > On Oct 4, 2014 10:11 PM, "Boaz Citrin" <bcit...@gmail.com> 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 <fiat...@gmail.com> 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 <bcit...@gmail.com>
> 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
