Is there a way to fetch results from LDAP using a count and an offset?
Entries returned to search requests are never ordered in any way, nor are attributes, attribute options, or attribute values. Some servers support VLV and server-side sorting, however.
For more information, see LDAP search.
Related
I use CouchDB 1.5.0 and noticed a strange thing:
When I query some API action, for example:
curl -X GET "http://localhost:5984/mydb/_changes?limit=1"
I get the same result with limit=1 and with limit=0 and with limit=-55. In all cases is a one row from the start of list.
Although, PostgreSQL returns:
Zero rows when LIMIT 0
Message ERROR: LIMIT must not be negative when LIMIT -55
My question is mainly concerned with the API design. I would like to know your opinions.
It's a flaw or maybe it's good/acceptable practice?
This is how the _changes api is designed. If you do not specify the type of feed i.e long-poll, continuous etc the default is to return a list of all the changes in a single results array.
If you want a row by row result of the changes in the database specify the type of feed in the url like so
curl -X GET "http://localhost:5984/mydb/_changes?feed=continuous"
Another point to note that in the _changes api using 0 has the same effect as using 1 in limit parameter.
We are using Apache SOLR for full text search. We have specific requirement for sorting the search results - basically when querying for data, we need 2 sets of data - A and B, but each set should have its own sorting criteria and we cannot make 2 different calls. We can get 2 sets by using an OR condition, but how do we sort each set differently ? To illustrate, if :
Set A = {3,1,2}
Set B = {8,5,9}
So, the expected response can have set A returned in ascending order {1,2,3} but the set B can be returned in descending order {9,8,5}
I believe the default sort in SOLR will sort the entire results sets. Any suggestions or if the question is not clear,let me know.
You can possibly achieve this using FieldCollapsing
You might need to do a little more work - i.e. have a display order field(could be an integer) so that Solr knows one field that it needs to sort by.
Next you could use a query like this -
&q=*&group=true&group.field=set&group.sort=display_order
I would recommend keeping the logic such as this out of Solr, it isn't meant to be a substitute for Relational Databases, and getting it to do complex SQL like operation (while some are possible) is going to be tricky.
By the way there is an open issue in Solr's JIRA that addresses batch processing of multiple queries. Which means, when it is merged into a release, you could fire n different queries to fetch these sets in one call to Solr.
If you are keen to have SOLR perform this task for you, the patch is available in the JIRA card, you could create a build for yourself and let us all know how it goes :)
I crawled with nutch 3 domains (domain01, domain02 and domain03).
I want to get all posts which contains specific keyword (ex. "champions league"), and than in results first show the posts from domain02, next posts from domain01 and last posts from domain03. simply i want to sort them in priority by domain
If there is a way to set priority of domains ?
If you always have the same order of domains, then you can use either index time document level boost or query time sort by domain (or domainorder) then by score.
If the domain order depends on the query, you can use QueryElevationComponent, though I think you have to provide full list of IDs then for each elevation rule and it may not support sequence.
You could also write your own Custom Function Query or component (similar to Query Elevation one).
As per what I found reading other sites :
SmartGWT uses data caching to optimize client-server connections and reduce network traffic. In your example, let's say you have the following in your database:
one word
two words
one sentence
When you type word, the fetch returns:
one word
two words
These values are cached in your client.
When you add one to word, because this is a more restraining search criteria, no need to server fetch, only client filter and the result is:
one word
Is there a way of avoiding this and make the search always against the server?
You can user the following properties of DataSource to turn caching OFF.
dataSource.setCacheAllData(false);
dataSource.setAutoCacheAllData(false);
If you want to turn the caching On, pass "true" to both function calls.
manually calling invalidateCache() on listgrid component should run the fetch method with actual criteria
I cannot get the Flickr API to return any data for lat/lon queries.
view-source:http://api.flickr.com/services/rest/?method=flickr.photos.search&media=photo&api_key=KEY_HERE&has_geo=1&extras=geo&bbox=0,0,180,90
This should return something, anything. Doesn't work if I use lat/lng either. I can get some photos returned if I lookup a place_id first and then use that in the query, except then all the photos returned are from anywhere and not the place id
Eg,
http://api.flickr.com/services/rest/?method=flickr.photos.search&media=photo&api_key=KEY_HERE&placeId=8iTLPoGcB5yNDA19yw
I deleted out my key obviously, replace with yours to test.
Any help appreciated, I am going mad over this.
I believe that the Flickr API won't return any results if you don't put additional search terms in your query. If I recall from the documentation, this is treated as an unbounded search. Here is a quote from the documentation:
Geo queries require some sort of limiting agent in order to prevent the database from crying. This is basically like the check against "parameterless searches" for queries without a geo component.
A tag, for instance, is considered a limiting agent as are user defined min_date_taken and min_date_upload parameters — If no limiting factor is passed we return only photos added in the last 12 hours (though we may extend the limit in the future).
My app uses the same kind of geo searching so what I do is put in an additional search term of the minimum date taken, like so:
http://api.flickr.com/services/rest/?method=flickr.photos.search&media=photo&api_key=KEY_HERE&has_geo=1&extras=geo&bbox=0,0,180,90&min_taken_date=2005-01-01 00:00:00
Oh, and don't forget to sign your request and fill in the api_sig field. My experience is that the geo based searches don't behave consistently unless you attach your api_key and sign your search. For example, I would sometimes get search results and then later with the same search get no images when I didn't sign my query.