How to create an Endeca query on combination of multiple fields [just like where clause in sql query]. Suppose we have three fields indexed are -
empId
empName
empGender
Now, I need a query like "where empName like 's%' AND empGender=male"
Thanks.
Firstly,
Checkout Record Filters in the Advanced Development Guide.
If you are trying to use a Record Filter on a property, you will need to enable it explicitly in Developer Studio for that property, while your Dimensions will automatically have the ability to apply a Record Filter. This will help when you have explicit values to filter on, for example empGender.
Your Record Filter can then look as follow:
Nr=AND(empGender:male)
You can further use the Ntk parameter to specify fields to search on so assuming your empName field is enabled for wildcard searching (configure this in Developer Studio) searching this field will look as follow:
Ntk=empName&Ntt=s*
So assuming your properties have been configured correctly, your example above will probably end up looking as follow:
Nr=AND(empGender:male)&Ntk=empName&Ntt=s*
To take this one step further, you can specify Search Filters (ie. Ntk + Ntt parameters) together. I haven't tried this for wildcards so you'll need to confirm that yourself but to combine Search Filters you delimit them with |
Ntk=empName|empId&Ntt=s*|1234*
I suggest you manually build up queries in the Reference Application to confirm you get your expected results and then start to code this up in your application.
radimbe, the problem with record filters for this use case is that they need to be precise. This means you don't get pelling correction, thesaurus expansion, case insensitivity or stemming. It's very unlikely that a user will input precise information like this.
Saraubh, you can do a boolean search to do OR text search queries. You can also use the Endeca Query Language to specify a complex set of boolean logic that goes beyond boolean search and which would incorporate spelling correction, stemming, etc.
In general though, I think for an application like this, you should move away from searching specific individual fields simultaneously and make use of the faceting capabilities of dimensions to guide the user. Additionally, a search box that searches many fields in combination simultaneously in order of importance is really the way to go for a simplified user interface for this sort of application.
Related
I have two requirements for my SOLR implementation:
I need to be able to search on multiple fields at the same time (preferably with field boosting). This is possible using dismax parser.
I also have a specific set of indexed fields (example gender field). I need to be able to apply such specific filters (example: select?q=david&gender:male&status:married). As per my understanding of dismax, this is not possible.
Please suggest if the second requirement can be handled using dismax (or edismax)? For now i am forced to use standard query parser, even though i really liked dismax.
There is nothing stopping you from using dismax or edismax. Use qf to tell it which fields to search by default, and use fq to apply queries that act as filters.
/select?q=david&fq=gender:male&fq=status:married&qf=name^10 address^3
Filter Queries doesn't affect score, and will be cached separately. If you always filter on both gender and status, you could combine them to get a single query cache instead (fq=gender:male AND status:married).
I'm trying to get a list of Change Requests that match certain conditions, some of these conditions are met by using functions like has_attr().
I would like to ask is it at all possible, I need for instance to use such function has_associated_task(cvtype="task") is it possible to do that?
For queries I'm using the following pattern:
http://ip[:port]/change/oslc/db/dbURI/role/User/cr?oslc_cm.query=change:cvtype="problem" and request_type="Change_Request" and has_associated_task(cvtype="task")&oslc_cm.properties=problem_synopsis
this does work without the function term but I would like to extend the search criteria further, is there any other way besides doing a predefined query in change? Is there somewhere a list of terms? like change:cvtype (I've tried to see this [http://www.ibm.com/xmlns/prod/rational/change/1.0/][1] but I got a "whoops" from the web server)
There are some ways you could solve this:
OSLC Resource Shapes - some OSLC providers associate shapes (like schemas) that describe what you can expect from an OSLC Query Capability.
There isn't a way in the simple query syntax to test for null (or not null), assuming you want to have some condition such as (cvtype="task" and linkedTask != NULL). To get around this you can simply query based on cvtype="task" and locally filter the results using tools such as XPath or Jena. Alternatively you can do is look for extensions to the tool you are working with to see if they provide any extensions to the query syntax to support your use case, I don't have this information off hand.
Multiple searches within a search result set while using all the search terms used in in that session.
For example, I have a table User (UserId, UserName, UserAddress, UserCity)
What I am trying to do is, I want to search all the columns in the table, for example using a user's name, (which might give me a result set consisting of more than 1 result). I want to be able to search within the result set again using a new search term (not necessarily have to have the first search term in the search field), but this time, it must search within the result set of the 1st search. This might go on breaking down the result set until what is required is found.
Sorry if I might sound very confusing with my request. I've tried and still got no clue to where to start with. I've tried googling and browsed through this website, but couldn't find what i am really trying to find.
I want to be able to search within the result-set again using a new
search term [...], but this time, it must search within the result set
of the 1st search .This might go on breaking down the result-set until
what is required is found.
It seems to me that you have not yet understood that SQL is a declarative language, not an imperative one. And yes, there are stored procedures, but these are a procedural extension to SQL and don't alter the fact that SQL is essentially declarative.
So instead of "breaking down the result-set until what is required is found", you specify all criteria at once, and preferably do so without resorting to a stored procedure until you've understood non-procedural SQL.
To give you an example, a query using multiple predicates (facts about the desired result specified in a WHERE clause) might look like this:
SELECT UserId FROM User
WHERE UserName LIKE 'cook%'
AND UserAddress LIKE 'sesam%'
AND UserCity = 'Hamburg';
I'm creating a self-help FAQ type application and one of the requirements is that the end user has to be able to search for FAQ topics. I have three models of note, listed below with their relevant (i.e. searchable) columns:
Topic: Name, Description
Question: Name, Answer
Problem: Name, Solution
All three tables are linked to Topic via a TopicID column. The idea is to provide a single textbox where the user can enter a search query, something either as a sentence (e.g. "How do I perform X") or a phrase (e.g. "Performing X" or "Perform X"), and provide all Topics/Questions/Problems that have any of the words they entered in either the name or description/answer/solution fields; the model will only ever have those columns searchable and I don't have to worry about filtering out the common words like "How" and such (It would be nice but isn't a requirement as it's not an exact match but a fuzzy match).
For reasons outside of my control, I have to use a Stored Procedure. My question is what would be the most appropriate way to handle a search like this; I've seen similar questions regarding multiple columns but really there is not a variable number of columns, there are always two columns per table that are actually searchable. The issue is that the search query could, in theory, be nearly anything - a sentence, a phrase, a comma-separated list of terms (e.g. "x,y,z"), so I would have to split the search term into components (e.g. split on whitespace) and then search each pair of columns for every term? Is that reasonably easy to do in SQL Server? The alternative, a little messier, is to just pull all the data back and then split the query and filter the results in the server-side code as there shouldn't ever be that many items entered, but I would feel a little dirty doing something like that ;-)
Suggest creating a new Full Text Catalog, and assign the table and columns to that catalog. Ensure your catalog is being updated at the right frequency for your needs.
You can then query this catalog using the FREETEXT predicate. It sounds like you need to match on those suffixes like 'ing', so suggest FREETEXT over CONTAINS in this case.
You can use a variable in this search, so it'll be easy to fit into a stored proc.
declare #token varchar(256);
select #token = 'perform';
select * from Problem
where freetext(Name, #token)
or freetext(Solution, #token);
--this will match 'perform' and 'performing'
I'm looking for a pattern for performing a dynamic search on multiple tables.
I have no control over the legacy (and poorly designed) database table structure.
Consider a scenario similar to a resume search where a user may want to perform a search against any of the data in the resume and get back a list of resumes that match their search criteria. Any field can be searched at anytime and in combination with one or more other fields.
The actual sql query gets created dynamically depending on which fields are searched. Most solutions I've found involve complicated if blocks, but I can't help but think there must be a more elegant solution since this must be a solved problem by now.
Yeah, so I've started down the path of dynamically building the sql in code. Seems godawful. If I really try to support the requested ability to query any combination of any field in any table this is going to be one MASSIVE set of if statements. shiver
I believe I read that COALESCE only works if your data does not contain NULLs. Is that correct? If so, no go, since I have NULL values all over the place.
As far as I understand (and I'm also someone who has written against a horrible legacy database), there is no such thing as dynamic WHERE clauses. It has NOT been solved.
Personally, I prefer to generate my dynamic searches in code. Makes testing convenient. Note, when you create your sql queries in code, don't concatenate in user input. Use your #variables!
The only alternative is to use the COALESCE operator. Let's say you have the following table:
Users
-----------
Name nvarchar(20)
Nickname nvarchar(10)
and you want to search optionally for name or nickname. The following query will do this:
SELECT Name, Nickname
FROM Users
WHERE
Name = COALESCE(#name, Name) AND
Nickname = COALESCE(#nick, Nickname)
If you don't want to search for something, just pass in a null. For example, passing in "brian" for #name and null for #nick results in the following query being evaluated:
SELECT Name, Nickname
FROM Users
WHERE
Name = 'brian' AND
Nickname = Nickname
The coalesce operator turns the null into an identity evaluation, which is always true and doesn't affect the where clause.
Search and normalization can be at odds with each other. So probably first thing would be to get some kind of "view" that shows all the fields that can be searched as a single row with a single key getting you the resume. then you can throw something like Lucene in front of that to give you a full text index of those rows, the way that works is, you ask it for "x" in this view and it returns to you the key. Its a great solution and come recommended by joel himself on the podcast within the first 2 months IIRC.
What you need is something like SphinxSearch (for MySQL) or Apache Lucene.
As you said in your example lets imagine a Resume that will composed of several fields:
List item
Name,
Adreess,
Education (this could be a table on its own) or
Work experience (this could grow to its own table where each row represents a previous job)
So searching for a word in all those fields with WHERE rapidly becomes a very long query with several JOINS.
Instead you could change your framework of reference and think of the Whole resume as what it is a Single Document and you just want to search said document.
This is where tools like Sphinx Search do. They create a FULL TEXT index of your 'document' and then you can query sphinx and it will give you back where in the Database that record was found.
Really good search results.
Don't worry about this tools not being part of your RDBMS it will save you a lot of headaches to use the appropriate model "Documents" vs the incorrect one "TABLES" for this application.