RavenDb LuceneQuery Suggest search - ravendb

I would like to attempt to take advantage of the Suggest feature in RavenDb. Is it possible to do this when using a session.Advanced.LuceneQuery?
I am using the Advanced option as I'm indexing in a multi-map scenario where the return type is not known, which prevents using the strongly typed Linq querying.

When using LuceneQuery, you need to call the store.DatabaseCommands.Suggest() yourself.

Related

Why are aggregate functions like group_by not supported in hibernate search?

Why are aggregate functions like group_by not supported in hibernate search?
I have a use case where i need to fetch results after applying group by in the query.
There is no technical reason, if this is what you mean. We could probably add it, but there simply wasn't enough demand for this feature to make it to the top of our priority list.
If you want to see a feature added to Hibernate Search, feel free to create a ticket on our JIRA instance, describing in details your use case and the API you would expect.
Note that I am not 100% sure we would implement it for the Lucene backend, since that would probably require a lot of effort. But for people using Elasticsearch behind Hibernate Search, we may at least introduce ways to use Elasticsearch's aggregation support from within Hibernate Search. We are currently experimenting with Hibernate Search 6 and trying this is on my checklist.
In the meantime, if you want us to suggest alternatives, please provide more details about your use case: domain model, mapping, fields you would like to aggregate as part of your "group by"...
Why it's missing
The primary reason for this to not be support by Hibernate Search is that noone ever asked for it or contributed it.
Another reason is that since the results would be "groups of entities" while the FulltextQuery API returns a List of entities, this would need a new API specifically to run such queries.
How to get it added
We could make that, but if there is not much interest in the feature it would possibly not be worth the maintenance work.
If you need such a feature I suggest you open an issue on the Hibernate Search issue tracker so that other people can also vote or express interest for it. Ideally, someone needing it like yourself might be willing to create a patch or at least start a proof of concept.
Alternatives
Until Hibernate Search provides direct support for it, you can still run such queries yourself. See Using IndexReaders directly to work on the Lucene index directly.
Using the IndexReaders you can always read and Search on Lucene using any advanced feature for which Hibernate Search doesn't provide an API.

Storing dynamic fields with Doctrine2

in our app, we are looking to use doctrine2, however, there is one feature we want to offer but am completely confused as to how it would work.
we want our customers to be able to define custom fields to our standard objects. so, these fields would be made on-the-fly, and not part of the object definition that is known and mapped by doctrine.
our first thought was to use nosql (mongodb or amazon dynamodb) to store some of this data, but since we want to use doctrine to handle our core objects, we would like to stay within the realm of doctrine to achieve this without have to extend beyond it to store this data.
one thing on my mind was using doctrine's ability to serialize/unserialize complex objects and just have like a hash of custom field names and their values as an extra property in the object, however, this would not allow us to have a feature that would search these fields if we ever wanted to allow that...
anyone ever attempted to do this with doctrine2 or any orm variant?
You could consider using Doctrine ODM, which is Doctrine 2 but for NoSQL - I believe they support at least MongoDB.
Another approach would be to use serialization as you said. You probably shouldn't worry about search too much - I would recommend to use a separate fulltext search engine (Solr, ElasticSearch, or other) as they provide much more versatility and performance for search vs SQL fulltext search.
Third, you could use Doctrine alongside with NoSQL. In this case, you probably should abstract your querying into a service class or such, so that you can use Doctrine to query for the data from your SQL DB, and some other to query the remaining data.
Finally, you could consider using a key-value table. One column represents the key, another the value.

Nhibernate 3.0 Complex queries

I need to perform queries that can be very complex, and I wanna make sure linq/queryOver can handle it.
what's the limitations and abilities I can't get with linq and can get with sql/hql ?
There isn't a list of limitations, other than the list of open bugs in Jira.
if you are performing complex queries, HQL is usually the best way to go.
However complex the query is you cna ultimately convert it toa QueryOver it might just get a little difficult and hard to read, but then you have a very strongly typed API.
Having said that you can always use HQL on your object model to achieve the same.
Session.CreateQuery("").List<>();
if that is difficult then there is always SQL to do the same.
Session.CreateSqlQuery("").ExecuteUpdate<>();
Session.CreateSqlQuery("").List<>();

Within ActiveRecordMediator, should use Execute or CreateSession?

Suppose I'm going to do something that needs access to NHibernate's ISession. For example running a Sql query via ISQLQuery or running a LINQ-to-NHibernate via session.Linq<MyType>(). I know there is 2 way to access ISession:
ActiveRecordMediator.GetSessionFactoryHolder().CreateSession()
ActiveRecordMediator.Execute()
What is the pros and cons of each one? additionally is there another alternative ways?
I can't think of any technical reason to prefer one over the other, however ActiveRecordMediator.Execute is the documented way.
BTW you don't need any of this to do LINQ queries, you can use Castle.ActiveRecord.Linq instead.

What to use for a flexible data access layer - OLEDB or...?

I am creating a quick and dirty prototype (C#) of an object-relational mapping tool. I would like to support at least two kinds of databases - one will be Microsoft SQL Server 2005/2008 and the other most probably MySQL.
Is there any way to use a single data base access mechanism for both database engines and what would it be?
Of course, I know that there will be differences in SQL query syntax, but in my case it is not that important - I'll use a tool to generate SQL queries which suit the certain db engine and user will be able to optimize those SQL queries.
The main idea is to have as flexible data provider solution as possible. Can it be done or not and how can it be done easier?
Note that I am not using this for a production system, just for a prototype, but still I'm curious how it is achieved in production OR/M tools - are they using completely separate access mechanism for each data provider or there are something common? And are they using DataReaders or there is some more appropriate way to retrieve data if I intend to transform data to business objects?
Thanks for any ideas, links etc.
Ok, I found it:
http://www.15seconds.com/issue/040127.htm
the solution is to use IDbxxx or Dbxxx as described in msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms379620(VS.80).aspx
Now I can specify only once what kind of DataProvider I use and then just use Db/IDb everywhere else.
I recommend nhibernate - which does what you want I think.
nhibernate.info