You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
But there is no way we can do it for inline arrays like [String].
One of the ideas is to introduce new operators _all, _any and _none that should count number of filter matches for every element in the array:
This would allow us to specify exactly how many matching elements should be in the array.
Tangentially related idea:
it might be also useful to request indexes of matching elements into the array and potentially afterwards use them to manipulate the array.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
currently we allow filtering of documents by related objects:
But there is no way we can do it for inline arrays like
[String]
.One of the ideas is to introduce new operators
_all
,_any
and_none
that should count number of filter matches for every element in the array:Alternatively (or additionally) we can integrate aggregates into filters with their own filters within:
This would allow us to specify exactly how many matching elements should be in the array.
Tangentially related idea:
it might be also useful to request indexes of matching elements into the array and potentially afterwards use them to manipulate the array.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: