Why sometime ents one-to-one with optional: true work, sometimes not?

so my schema is this:

    wallets: defineEnt({
      privateKey: v.string(),
    })
      .edge("balance", { optional: true })
      .edge("user")
      .edge("store"),

    balances: defineEnt({
      balance: v.any() as BalanceMap,
    })
      .edge("wallet")
      .edge("store")
      .edge("user"),

    wallets: defineEnt({
      privateKey: v.string(),
    })
      .edge("balance", { optional: true })
      .edge("user")
      .edge("store"),

    balances: defineEnt({
      balance: v.any() as BalanceMap,
    })
      .edge("wallet")
      .edge("store")
      .edge("user"),

I first create wallet then I create balance

    // create wallet
    const walletId = await ctx.db.insert("wallets", {
      privateKey: wallet.privateKey,
      userId: ctx.userId,
      storeId,
    });

    // create balance
    const balanceId = await ctx.db.insert("balances", {
      walletId,
      balance: initialBalance,
      userId: ctx.userId,
      storeId,
    });

    // connect balance to the wallet
    await ctx.db.patch(walletId, { balanceId }); 

// ❌ this is where ts and console is not happy. no balanceId field on wallet table, but walletId field on balance seem to be fine

    // create wallet
    const walletId = await ctx.db.insert("wallets", {
      privateKey: wallet.privateKey,
      userId: ctx.userId,
      storeId,
    });

    // create balance
    const balanceId = await ctx.db.insert("balances", {
      walletId,
      balance: initialBalance,
      userId: ctx.userId,
      storeId,
    });

    // connect balance to the wallet
    await ctx.db.patch(walletId, { balanceId }); 

// ❌ this is where ts and console is not happy. no balanceId field on wallet table, but walletId field on balance seem to be fine

In other cases I also use this approach with optional: true and it seem to work fine

17 Replies

Michal Srb•5mo ago

The field storing the edge is on the required end of the edge. So in your case it's walletId stored on balances.

kstulgysOP•5mo ago

ah i thought it will store Ids on both ends. If I want relation on both ends I should use: in balances table: walletId: Id<"wallets"> in wallet table: balanceId: Id<"balances"> right? these are indexed automatically right? The reason I need this is because I want to query/get one when I know the other and vice versa is that the right path to think about this case?

Michal Srb•5mo ago

The reason I need this is because I want to query/get one

You don't need to store the IDs in both tables. You can traverse the edge from either side: https://labs.convex.dev/convex-ents/read#traversing-11-edge

Reading Ents from the Database - Convex Ents

Relations, default values, unique fields and more for Convex

Michal Srb•5mo ago

And you couldn't make both IDs required, since you have to create one of the documents first.

kstulgysOP•5mo ago

I use regular querying so this should work right?

// defining tables

    wallets: defineEnt({
      privateKey: v.string(),
    })
      .edge("balance", { optional: true })
      .edge("user")
      .edge("store"),

    balances: defineEnt({
      balance: v.any() as BalanceMap,
    })
      .edge("wallet")
      .edge("store")
      .edge("user")

// querying

const wallet = await ctx.db
  .query("wallets")
  .withIndex("balanceId", (q) => q.eq("balanceId", balanceId))
  .unique();

const balance = await ctx.db
  .query("balances")
  .withIndex("walletId", (q) => q.eq("walletId", walletId))
  .unique();

// defining tables

    wallets: defineEnt({
      privateKey: v.string(),
    })
      .edge("balance", { optional: true })
      .edge("user")
      .edge("store"),

    balances: defineEnt({
      balance: v.any() as BalanceMap,
    })
      .edge("wallet")
      .edge("store")
      .edge("user")

// querying

const wallet = await ctx.db
  .query("wallets")
  .withIndex("balanceId", (q) => q.eq("balanceId", balanceId))
  .unique();

const balance = await ctx.db
  .query("balances")
  .withIndex("walletId", (q) => q.eq("walletId", walletId))
  .unique();

Michal Srb•5mo ago

const wallet = await ctx.db.get((await ctx.db.get(balanceId)).walletId);
const balance = await ctx.db
  .query("balances")
  .withIndex("walletId", (q) => q.eq("walletId", walletId))
  .unique();

const wallet = await ctx.db.get((await ctx.db.get(balanceId)).walletId);
const balance = await ctx.db
  .query("balances")
  .withIndex("walletId", (q) => q.eq("walletId", walletId))
  .unique();

kstulgysOP•5mo ago

Is this an alternative or essentially only this will work?

Michal Srb•5mo ago

Only this will work with the way ents model the edges. But you can add the extra field in if you want. But then you're on the hook on keeping the fields in-sync (writes). I'm curious how/why you're using the Ents schema but not ctx.table?

kstulgysOP•5mo ago

queries like ctx.table... requires additional setup and I need to maintain that setup, for now regular queries and mutations works just fine,

Michal Srb•5mo ago

Interesting, so you find the schema valuable enough on its own (mainly for edges?)? You won't get typechecked reads for many:many edges.

kstulgysOP•5mo ago

Yeah, I think ents makes it nice to define schema. I've been reading some ents docs and actually thinking to migrate to ctx.table... thing since it brings additional benefits. Any chance to include these helpers (functions) in convex-helpers package?

Michal Srb•5mo ago

Which helpers would you like to see? There are some relationship helpers already in convex-helpers.

kstulgysOP•5mo ago

functions are required to declaredin functions.ts file to use ents querying, mutations and actions

Michal Srb•5mo ago

@kstulgys I don't understand. The functions.ts file name is just a suggested convention, you can put custom functions wherever you like.

kstulgysOP•5mo ago

those functions that are inside functions.ts... I would like to import these from convex-helpers rather than maintaining it myself.

ian•5mo ago

I suspect you'll find that you'll end up wanting to put more things in those functions - or making more versions of them, e.g. one that automatically checks that the logged in user is an admin. The trick with having a helpers version would be that they need to be typed to your schema, so you'd still need to define them somewhere that you can add type parameters. e.g. const { query, mutation, ...} = entFunctions(schema)

kstulgysOP•5mo ago

make sense ,thank you

Why sometime ents one-to-one with optional: true work, sometimes not?

Did you find this page helpful?