I'm returning collection results via a basic find() query and something odd is happening to the {{_id}} I'm receiving. Instead of just the unique id, I'm getting a bunch of trailing garbage that looks like other parts of the document. This is only happening for one collection - the exact same query works perfectly with all my other collections. I'm thinking it may have something to do with how I'm adding collection items, but I'm pretty lost. I can provide more info if needed, but I thought perhaps someone had encountered this before and could advise based on what I've described.
Here's what {{_id}} looks like for documents in the problematic collection:
3D5DWGh9n96BuiC4P""%7B"userId":"hJhLm8iBL9cQDEhzf","limit":10,"skip":0,"props":%7B%7D%7D
Anyone know what's going on here?
NB: Here's extra information I stupidly omitted the first time:
The trailing stuff is not returned when I do I find().fetch(). It's only when I use the easy-search package ( link ) that this happens. Sorry for the lack of clarity earlier.
The helper:
Template.search.helpers({
articlesIndex: () => ArticlesIndex
});
...relevant parts of the template:
{{> EasySearch.Input index=articlesIndex}}
<ul>
{{#EasySearch.Each index=articlesIndex}}
<li>{{title}}</li>
{{/EasySearch.Each}}
</ul>
The hrefs in the search results are where the problematic _ids are.
Actually, it looks like I've figured it out. According to the issues on github, _id is used by the package so I have to refer to __originalId instead. Here's a link in case it helps anyone else: link
Related
I would like for an autocomplete to get the terms starting with some specific characters.However, the terms returned do not begin with the specified text ("wer" in this case), and more than that, no matter what the prefix content is, they are always the same. The query I am using now is:
{"facets":
{"count":
{"terms":
{"field":"content"},
"facet_filter":
{"prefix":{"content":"wer"}}
}
},
"size":0
}
I am wondering what am I missing or doing wrong. Any help much appreciated. Thanks!
Perhaps you miss a "query" entry after the facet_filter.
If this does not help try regex pattern for facets, but be aware that facets will be removed in future updates of elasticsearch.
http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/search-facets-terms-facet.html#_regex_patterns
here is my collection
Ques_Coll.insert({question: quest,owner:u_name,comments:[]});
After user enters comment, collection will be updated like this
Ques_Coll.update({_id:this._id},{$push:{comments:{uname:"xxx",cmt_text:"xxx"}}});
Until this working fine
Now, i want to iterate through all the comments and want to display them
how to do it?
this is how i tried and not working
{{#each all_comments.comments}}
<li>{{uname}}</li>
<li>{{cmt_text}}</li>
{{/each}}
this is my template //i think my problem lies in this returning value
all_comments:function()
{
return Ques_Coll.find( {_id:this._id},{fields: {'comments': 1}})
}
Use findOne instead:
Ques_Coll.findOne( {_id:this._id},{fields: {'comments': 1}})
You use find when you're searching for more than one question to match the criteria. But since you're looking for one (the one with the comments), you use findOne instead.
Am hoping someone with enough insight into the inner workings of Lucene might be able to point me in the right direction =)
I'll skip most of the surrounding irellevant code, and cut right to the chase. I have a Lucene index, to which I am adding the following field to the index (variables replaced by their literal values):
document.Add( new Field("Typenummer", "E5CEB501A244410EB1FFC4761F79E7B7",
Field.Store.YES , Field.Index.UN_TOKENIZED));
Later, when I search my index (using other types of queries), I am able to verify that this field does indeed appear in my index - like when looping through all Fields returned by Document.GetFields()
Field: Typenummer, Value: E5CEB501A244410EB1FFC4761F79E7B7
So far so good :-)
Now the real problem is - why can I not use a TermQuery to search against this value and actually get a result.
This code produces 0 hits:
// Returns 0 hits
bq.Add( new TermQuery( new Term( "Typenummer",
"E5CEB501A244410EB1FFC4761F79E7B7" ) ), BooleanClause.Occur.MUST );
But if I switch this to a WildcardQuery (with no wildcards), I get the 1 hit I expect.
// returns the 1 hit I expect
bq.Add( new WildcardQuery( new Term( "Typenummer",
"E5CEB501A244410EB1FFC4761F79E7B7" ) ), BooleanClause.Occur.MUST );
I've checked field lengths, I've checked that I am using the same Analyzer and so on and I am still on square 1 as to why this is.
Can anyone point me in a direction I should be looking?
I finally figured out what was going on. I'm expanding the tags for this question as it, much to my surprise, actually turned out to be an issue with the CMS this particular problem exists in. In summary, the problem came down to this:
The field is stored UN_TOKENIZED, meaning Lucene will store it excactly "as-is"
The BooleanQuery I pasted snippets from gets sent to the Sitecore SearchManager inside a PreparedQuery wrapper
The behaviour I expected from this was, that my query (having already been prepared) would go - unaltered - to the Lucene API
Turns out I was wrong. It passes through a RewriteQuery method that copies my entire set of nested queries as-is, with one exception - all the Term arguments are passed through a LowercaseStrategy()
As I indexed an UPPERCASE Term (UN_TOKENIZED), and Sitecore changes my PreparedQuery to lowercase - 0 results are returned
Am not going to start an argument of whether this is "by design" or "by design flaw" implementation of the Lucene Wrapper API - I'll just note that rewriting my query when using the PreparedQuery overload is... to me... unexpected ;-)
Further teachings from this; storing the field as TOKENIZED will eliminate this problem too, as the StandardAnalyzer by default will lowercase all tokens.
here's my model:
class Person
acts_as_tree
end
i relate multiple objects as a tree:
P1
|
---
| |
P1.1 P1.2
|
---
| |
P1.1.1 P1.1.2
here if i need to retreive P1.1.1 i need to write a query that effectively asks:
get me the Person with name P1.1.1 and path (given by acts_as_tree) [P1, P1.1].
querying by just name is not enough as i can have similar named people at multiple paths.
how do i do this?
> db.people.find({name: 'P1.1.1'})
above snippet will show me the path attribute correctly as expected, but i cannot query by that path.
> db.people.find({name: 'P1.1.1', path: [{name: 'P1'}, {name: 'P1.1'}]})
doesn't work. neither does:
> db.people.find({name: 'P1.1.1', path: [db.people.find({name: 'P1'}),
db.people.find({name: 'P1.1'})]})
but that explains what i'm trying to do.
One of the ways where you can query something like as follows:
db.people.find({name : 'Joe', 'path' : { $all : [ObjectId("4e0fcf1722b7a9439200002e"), ObjectId("4e0fcf1622b7a9439200002b")]}})
However the drawback I think of this is:
You don't get to substitute the object relations/joins directly in mongo shell. You have to use the ObjectId object
The $all clause does not necessitate that the order of path is strictly same, which means that a person with name "Joe" referenced by path "hometown/town/" would come up as well as "Joe" from "tome/hometown".
I would presume that second one may be a deal breaker. Also, I am presuming that mongoid in several cases pass across the query options directly to mongodb (or atleast there are ways to do that). Hence it should be possible to do a search in ruby code using given query above.
Nevertheless, I'll do some more re-search on this and post my findings back.
Hope it helps.
Edit
To alleviate the second problem above there is also another way to query a person with a specific path. Find it below:
db.people.find({name : 'Joe', 'path.0' :ObjectId("4e0fcf1722b7a9439200002e"), 'path.1':ObjectId("4e0fcf1622b7a9439200002b")})
This would ensure that path is exactly what you are looking for. However this works in mongodb shell and you may still need to figure out, how mongoid can run an equivalent of this. Plus you may have to construct this query dynamically to create a path for person and that (for deep nested people) may just become long and ugly.
I would suggest skimming through following links on mongodb documentation to get a better understanding.
http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Dot+Notation+%28Reaching+into+Objects%29
http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Advanced+Queries#AdvancedQueries-ValueinanArray
I hope this is what you were looking for.
Hi I am looking for a way to get the whole index if my query is nothing.
My lucene is a picture of my database without some unwanted content, like expired annonces...
So I would like to use only lucene to get annonces, and for that I need a way to get the whole index.
Any ideas?
thanks!
This is not the answer but something wich works for me:
Using an indexKey like is_indexed, always true.
I am adding "is_indexed:1" to my query and it works...
If you have something else, let me know!
I tend to use a field which is named after the index such as:
$oDoc->addField(
Zend_Search_Lucene_Field::keyword(
'index',
'availability'
)
);
Then the term query will return all fields. It's not pretty but it works fine.