Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

NUMERIC index bug for long type #6534

Closed
4 tasks
publicocean0 opened this issue Aug 6, 2016 · 9 comments
Closed
4 tasks

NUMERIC index bug for long type #6534

publicocean0 opened this issue Aug 6, 2016 · 9 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@publicocean0
Copy link

publicocean0 commented Aug 6, 2016

OrientDB Version, operating system, or hardware.

  • v2.0 SNAPSHOT[ ] - .18[ ] .17[ ] .16[ ] .15[ ] .14[ ] .13[ ] .12[ ] .11[ ] .10[ ] .9[ ] .8[ ] .7[ ] .6[ ] .5[ ] .4[ ] .3[ ] .2[ ] .1[ ] .0[ ]
  • v2.1 SNAPSHOT[ ] - .16[ ] .15[ ] .14[ ] .13[ ] .12[ ] .11[ ] .10[ ] .9[ ] .8[ ] .7[ ] .6[ ] .5[ ] .4[ ] .3[ ] .2[ ] .1[ ] .0[ ]
  • v2.2 SNAPSHOT[ ] - .rc1[x ] .beta2[ ] .beta1[ ]

Operating System

  • [x ] Linux
  • MacOSX
  • Windows
  • Other Unix
  • Other, name?

Expected behavior and actual behavior

select from ( select expand(rid) from index:A.lucene where key LUCENE ' sequence:[22 TO *] '  limit 11 )
ref | sequence | 
#4:22 | 10 
#4:22 | 11 
#4:22 | 12 
@publicocean0 publicocean0 changed the title lucene index bug for long type NUMERIC index bug for long type Aug 6, 2016
@publicocean0
Copy link
Author

select from r

+----+-----+------+----+----+
|# |@Rid |@Class|b |a |
+----+-----+------+----+----+
|0 |#60:0|r |100 | |
|1 |#60:1|r |10 | |
|2 |#60:2|r | |10 |
+----+-----+------+----+----+

3 item(s) found. Query executed in 0.002 sec(s).
select from r where [a,b] lucene "a:>3"

0 item(s) found. Query executed in 0.004 sec(s).
select from r where [a,b] lucene "a:[3 TO *]"
0 item(s) found. Query executed in 0.004 sec(s).

@publicocean0
Copy link
Author

a is integer, b is long
no one is working

@robfrank robfrank self-assigned this Aug 6, 2016
@robfrank
Copy link
Contributor

robfrank commented Aug 8, 2016

Why don't use SQL instead of lucene indexes?

@publicocean0
Copy link
Author

publicocean0 commented Aug 8, 2016

because my class has a billion of rows. The query above is simplified just for your test

@wolf4ood
Copy link
Member

@publicocean0

long/integer type are not supported . That means that if you run range query with lucene syntax it will not work since there is not logic in the integration between OrientDB and Lucene to handle range query.

@publicocean0
Copy link
Author

publicocean0 commented Aug 10, 2016

it would be better to write in documentation this important limitation else developers invests time to develop architectures not working then. In orientdb 3.0 will be available?

@wolf4ood
Copy link
Member

@publicocean0 we can mark this as enhancement.

It shouldn't be hard to support it

@wolf4ood wolf4ood added this to the 3.0 milestone Aug 10, 2016
@publicocean0
Copy link
Author

publicocean0 commented Aug 10, 2016

surely it requires 10 minutes

@robfrank robfrank modified the milestones: 2.2.x (next hotfix), 3.0 Dec 15, 2016
robfrank added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 15, 2016
robfrank added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 15, 2016
@robfrank robfrank modified the milestones: 2.2.x (next hotfix), 2.2.14 Dec 19, 2016
robfrank added a commit to orientechnologies/orientdb-docs that referenced this issue Dec 22, 2016
@robfrank
Copy link
Contributor

We support range queries over numeric fields and date/datetime fields starting from version 2.2.14.
It didn't take us only 10 minutes to develop the support for ranges. Documentation will be updated shortly: http://orientdb.com/docs/2.2.x/Full-Text-Index.html

robfrank added a commit to orientechnologies/orientdb-docs that referenced this issue Dec 22, 2016
luigidellaquila pushed a commit to SAP/orientdb-enterprise-agent that referenced this issue Jan 17, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants