Maps Nested unknown attributes not set when saveUnknown is true

[fishcharlie]

Maps Nested unknown attributes not set when saveUnknown is true. This issue is related to #236.

[jignesh248]

@fishcharlie I wish to contribute, to fix this bug and nested partial updates bug, both are troubling me too much. I wish to fix them but I fail to understand the flow of execution of code. Is there any way that you or somebody can put a walk through of the basic code in plain english, so that it is easy to follow code.

Thanks

[fishcharlie]

@jignesh248 Awesome!! Honestly I haven't looked through this section of the code very much. Do you have any specific questions or are you looking for a broad overview?

[jignesh248]

just looking for a broad overview.

Honestly I haven't looked through this section of the code very much.

I dunno in other thread you have created a PR for saveUknown failing silently even on top level, I guess that part is working on version released on NPM but only nested unknown field fails .

[fishcharlie]

@jignesh248 Yeah I jut moved that to a separate issue (this one). I would look into that PR that was created for the top level stuff and see if you can replicate it for nested items. Sadly that's the only insight I have right now.

[mbejda]

This is still an issue. I don't think that PR resolved it.
Here is how the issue can be replicated :
Model and Schema

const dynamoose = require('dynamoose');
const shortId = require('shortid');
const Schema = dynamoose.Schema;
const schema = new Schema({
    adUrlId: {
        type: String,
            rangeKey: true,
    default: shortId.generate
    },
    customerId:{
        type: String,
            required: true,
            hashKey: true
    },
    userId: {
        type: String,
            required: true
    },
    title : {
        type: String,
            required: true
    },
    type: {
        type: String,
            required: true
    },
    desktop: Map
        mobile: Map,
    app: Map,
    campaignId: {
        type: String,
        required: true,
        index: {
            global: true,
            rangeKey: 'customerId'
        }
    }
});

const Model = dynamoose.model('AdUrl', schema,{
    update: true,
    timestamps: true,
    useDocumentTypes: true,
    saveUnknown: ['mobile'],
    throughput: {
        read: 1,
        write: 1
    }
});

module.exports = Model;

Saving New model with a nested mobile property "123".

    try {
        const AdUrlModel = req.app.locals.MODELS.AdUrl;
        const adUrlModel = new AdUrlModel({
            title: '123',
            type: 'cats',
            userId: 123,
            customerId: 123,
            campaignId: 123,
            mobile: {
                "123" : '123'
            }
        });
        const results= await adUrlModel.save();
        res.json(results);
    }catch(e){

    }

Outcome

{
    "title": "123",
    "type": "cats",
    "userId": "123",
    "customerId": "123",
    "campaignId": "123",
    "mobile": {},
    "adUrlId": "r3szmtJs9"
}

Mobile property did not save.....

[fishcharlie]

@dobrynin Thoughts on this?

[dobrynin]

I think the problem may be that the changes I applied were only to parseDynamo. I think something similar needs to be done in the map section of Attribute#toDynamo

[fishcharlie]

@dobrynin Any chance you could create a PR for that and add a test for this?

[bwaters57]

Curious: has there been any movement on this issue? My team is running across this problem as well, with a case similar to what mbejda described.

[dobrynin]

@bwaters57, sorry haven’t had the chance to look into this yet. Hopefully this weekend. If you have a solution and would like to submit a PR, you’re welcome to do that :)

[fishcharlie]

I tried to take a look at this. I'm struggling to create a failing test case tho. I'm having the same problem in one of my projects. Not sure why I'm not able to create a failing test case. Or solve it.

[bwaters57]

If it helps make a failing case for testing, here is the generalized schema that we're working with:

const schema = new Dynamoose.Schema({
  id: {
    type: String,
    hashKey: true,
  },
  genericObject: Map,
}, { useDocumentTypes: true, saveUnknown: true });

And an example of this would be:

{
   'id': 'some_guid',
   'genericObject': { 
        '111_222':
         {
           id: 'some_other_guid',
           code1: 111,
           code2: 222,
         },
        '333_444':
         {
           id: 'some_other_guid',
           code1: 333,
           code2: 444,
         }
     }
}

For context, the reason the Map is generic is because the keys within are a composite of code1 and code2 that we will later be filtering on. Similar to mbejda's post above, saving and retrieving my example yields the following:

{
  id: 'some_guid',
  genericObject: {} 
}

[fishcharlie]

@bwaters57 I think I figured this out. Working on creating a PR now.

[fishcharlie]

@mbejda One thing I just connected the dots on. Is the saveUnknown option should be part of your schema options, not model options.