Skip to content

General

General

Categories

JUMP TO ANOTHER FORUM

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

113 results found

  1. 106 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    5 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. I believe that by simply allowing access to the whereArrayContains filter value, it should be possible to solve for a use-case which can generally only be resolved using an SQL/relational database or cloud functions.

    Take the following query;

          getDocs(
            query(
              collection(db, "profiles"),
              where("groupProfileLinkIdReference", "array-contains", "groupProfileLinkId1"),
              limit(1),
            ),
          )
    

    If we can access the value which in this case is "groupProfileLinkId1", it becomes possible to do the following;

    match /profiles/{profileId} {
          allow list: if validateListProfileDbEntry();
    }
    
    function validateListProfileDbEntry(){
      let groupProfileLinkId = resource.data.groupProfileLinkIdReference[0];
      let groupProfileLink = get(/databases/$(database)/documents/groupProfileLink/$(groupProfileLinkId)).data;
    
    
      return groupProfileLink.isApproved == true;
    }
    
    

    The way the data is modelled is that every time…

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. adding a function like FieldValue.serverTimestamp() that does the same thing but assigns time in epoch format rather than in normal date time format.

    it may be a better choice in order to reduce the data transfer and document collection size.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. I'm using Go client, and at this time UUIDs are represented as array of numbers. This doesn't make any sense and is quite clunky and unergonomic, but this is the client behaviour - the Go type [16]byte converts to that, and there is no way to affect it directly.

    This also means that a list of UUIDs is impossible to represent at all, since a Go slice converts into an array, and Firestore can't handle arrays in arrays. Btw, that by itself is ridiculous, but right now my problem is with UUIDs specifically.

    A list of IDs is a trivial…

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. Many time, we have a collection that is created using data received from an API call and the collection needs to be reset to the new data received in the next API call. For e.g., I have a collaborative app. Each user can see who else in their address-book using the app, such that they can collaborate with them. I send the phone contacts to the backend and we check which contacts and using the app and initialize the contacts collection. The phone contacts are synched every day. The next day, when we get the phone contacts, I want simply…

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. 16 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. Ability to search collections and documents in the Firestore UI.

    87 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    5 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. currently security rules can only check, "limit, orderby and offset" properties of "request.query" object. if they could check our own custom properties , for example, when users search a collection by id, and I only want them to see a list of documents which contain their id then i should be able to do this in the rules
    posts/{postId} {
    list: if request.query.id == request.auth.uid
    }
    - this would be really beautiful and makes it way easy to secure list request.

    3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. In Firebase's Firestore, a user with write access to a project can simply delete any document and even a whole collection with multiple documents with a single click. This is a major security problem as any of my team member may end up deleting a whole collection with millions of documents in under a minute, through the Firebase console.

    I would like to request for a feature to disable this.

    To be clear - The possibility to grant write access without delete access. Currently, if I am not mistaken, through the User and Permissions panel it's kind of "all or…

    12 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  10. A document always maintain createdAt / updatedAt timestamp value internally. But these fields can't be used for ordering documents.

    For example :-

    (This is possible)

    await citiesRef.orderBy('name').limit(3).get();

    (This is NOT possible)

    await citiesRef.orderBy('created_at').limit(3).get();

    Currently if we need order by timestamp, we need to maintain a separate timestamp field alongside internal createdAt / updatedAt fields. Then create index over that additional field to perform order by timestamp.

    Similar to name sentinel, firestore should provide created_at and updated_at sentinel for ordering document. These sentinel should work without any new index, ascending or descending order.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  11. I have read this article https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/solutions/geoqueries in mentions cool examples on how to implement Geohashes, but I can't find python examples. Is there a recommended way of implementing geohashes on Firebase Admin SDK for python?

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  12. I suggest that Firebase enhances the Firestore console by adding support for keyboard navigation, allowing users to move between documents using the up and down arrow keys. This feature would improve accessibility and efficiency, especially for users who prefer using the keyboard over the mouse or trackpad. Implementing this functionality would make data management in Firestore more user-friendly and accessible to a wider range of users.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  13. 74 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  14. Hi Team,
    We are supporting our services in Sudan also, but the country is not listed in remote config country list.
    How to provide country specific config to Sudan?

    Thanks & Regards,
    Ram

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  15. 75 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  16. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  17. When working with Firestore databases, you may want to restore an entire database for testing in your stage project.

    However, currently, you can only restore in the same project

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  18. The UX when reading large objects in the firestore explorer UI requires too much scrolling in small windows to find the information you are after. I'd propose to:

    Note: "window" here refers to where the container where the data of a document can be found or alternatively where all the collection can be found. So the firestore explorer contains usually, a collection window, a document window, (a sub collections window, a document window,...).

    • collapse maps by default, or collapse maps if the object is larger than the current window. When dealing with large objects it's currently annoying to find the…
    7 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  19. There is currently no way to filter on reference fields in the Firestore panel of the Firebase console.

    20 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    6 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  20. I am submitting a feature request to introduce a 'unique()' operator in Firestore's security rules, offering a streamlined method to enforce data uniqueness within collections. This operator would not only simplify validation and potentially reduce reads by leveraging Firestore's hidden index table, but also eliminate the need for a separate cloud function, similar to the 'get()' and 'exists()' operations.

    Background:

    At present, ensuring data uniqueness in Firestore often requires workarounds that are less than optimal and can impact scalability.

    Feature Proposal:

    The proposed 'unique()' operator would operate much like the 'exists()' operation, but with a focus on reading Firestore's concealed…

    25 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  Firestore  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  • Don't see your idea?