I'm facing some strange issue with "doc." keyword on Nest C# Elasticsearch.
I'm using Couchbase, and I have a class where one of its fields is an array of objects
I try to search inside this array for a specific value.
Something like this:
string mailFilesKey = string.Empty;
ISearchResponse<object> result = _mainManager.Client.Search<object>(c => c
.Type("MailFiles")
.Query(q =>
q.Term("SentFile_Id", fileId))
.Size(1));
Now, this thing actually works. But when I do this one, it doesn't work:
q.Term("doc.SentFile_Id", fileId))
Why?
haha ok nice one. I had this thing long time ago when i started to use Nest and elastic. If you have the object then you can use lambda expressions
like f=>f.SentFile_Id.
Now when you use a string to get the name of the field in nest you must know that all fields, index name, types in elastic are stored with lowercase first letter. So you should use this : q.Term("sentFile_Id", fileId))
Should work just fine.
Related
So I'm doing some tests with GraphQL, and I'm failing in doing something that I believe is fairly simple.
When going to the GraphQL demo site (https://graphql.org/swapi-graphql) I'm presented with a default query which goes like this:
{
allFilms {
films {
title,
director,
releaseDate
}
}
}
This works as expected and returns a list of films.
Now - I would like to modify this query to return only the films where the director is George Lucas, and for the life of me - I can't figure out how to do that.
I've tried using the where and filter expressions, and also change the second line to films: (director: "George Lucas") but keep getting error messages.
What's the correct syntax for doing that?
Thanks!
If you check the docs of the provided GraphQL schema, you'll see that this is not possible. Following is the definition of the allFilms field:
allFilms(
after: String
first: Int
before: String
last: Int
): FilmsConnection
As per the doc, it has 4 input arguments, which are after, first, before, and last. There is no way to filter this out using the director's name.
GraphQL is not SQL. You cannot use expressions like WHERE or FILTER in GraphQL. The schema is already defined and the filters are pre-defined too. If the schema does not allow you to filter values using a certain field, you just can't do it.
You can to see the graphql schema here https://github.com/graphql/swapi-graphql/blob/master/schema.graphql
The allFilms query does not contain a filter for the field director. Also i can't find other query with this filter.
Most likely you need to write a filter on the result of the query.
I searched NEST docs but seems to cant find a proper answer for it.
My question is how to search multiple indices against some index pattern using NEST? e.g
if I have indices with following names in Elasticsearch DB
media-2017-10, media-2018-03, media-2018-04
For specifying my selected indices, I need to use wild card character * like this:
client.Search<Media>(s => s
.Index("media-*")
. query goes here .....
Is it possible in NEST ?
Yes, this works. Try it :)
.Index(...) accepts wildcard indices
You can also search in multiple indices in that way:
var allIndices = new[] {
"media-*",
"docs-*",
"common-*"
};
Nest.Indices allIndices = allIndices;
return _elasticClient
.SearchAsync<EsBaseModel>(s => s
.Index( allIndices)
.Size(_esConfig.MaxCallIDsSize)
.RequestConfiguration(r => r.RequestTimeout(TimeSpan.FromMinutes(5)))
.Query(q =>
q.Match(m => m.Field("fieldname").Query(condition))
));
Steps:
Just create an array with string indices.
Indices can be explicit or implicit using any pattern supported in Nest client docs.
Notice - neet to put attention to optimize the searching, since it could take a while to search in all the indices that you've provided.
(optimize can be achieved by ignoring very old dates, limit the results, etc...)
I have a class AttributeValue containing two string fields:
string DataType
string Category
My mongo query is as below:
var test19 = _repo.All().Where(p => p.Rule.Any(r => r.Target.AnyOf.Any(an => an.AllOf.Any(av => av.Match != null && policyFilters2.Contains(string.Concat(av.Match.AttributeValue.DataType, av.Match.AttributeValue.Category))))));
where policyFilters2 is List<string>
The above query gives me an error:
"Unable to determine the serialization information for the expression:
String.Concat(av.Match.AttributeValue.DataType,
av.Match.AttributeValue.Category)."
I am not sure what needs to be done to resolve this.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
I don't think MongoDB can do a search on concatenated values like that. Try concatenating the two fields separately in a field and then try the query.
Eventually, I had to search for both the fields using logical AND rather than concatenating
I have an application that manages documents called Notes. Like a blog, Notes can be searched for matches against one or more Tags, which are contained in a Note.Tags collection property. A Tag has Name and ID properties, and matches are made against the ID. A user can specify multiple tags to match against, in which case a Note must contain all Tags specified to match.
I have a very complex LINQ query to perform a Note search, with extension methods and looping. Quite frankly, it has a real code smell to it. I want to rewrite the query with something much simpler. I know that if I made the Tag a simple string, I could use something like this:
var matchingNotes = from n in myNotes
where n.Tags.All(tag => searchTags.Contains(tag))
Can I do something that simple if my model uses a Tag object with an ID? What would the query look like. Could it be written in fluent syntax? what would that look like?
I believe you can find notes that have the relevant tags in a single LINQ expression:
IQueryable<Note> query = ... // top part of query
query = query.Where(note => searchTags.All(st =>
note.Tags.Any(notetag => notetag.Id == st.Id)));
Unfortunately there is no “fluent syntax” equivalent for All and Any, so the best you can do there is
query = from note in query
where searchTags.All(st =>
note.Tags.Any(notetag => notetag.Id == st.Id))
select note;
which is not that much better either.
For starters see my comment; I suspect the query is wrong anyway! I would simplifiy it, by simply enforcing separately that each tag exists:
IQueryable<Note> query = ... // top part of query
foreach(var tagId in searchTagIds) {
var tmpId = tagId; // modified closures...
query = query.Where(note => note.Tags.Any(t => t.Id == tmpId));
}
This should have the net effect of enforcing all the tags specified are present and accounted for.
Timwi's solution works in most dialects of LINQ, but not in Linq to Entities. I did find a single-statement LINQ query that works, courtesy of ReSharper. Basically, I wrote a foreach block to do the search, and ReSharper offered to convert the block to a LINQ statement--I had no idea it could do this.
I let ReSharper perform the conversion, and here is what it gave me:
return searchTags.Aggregate<Tag, IQueryable<Note>>(DataStore.ObjectContext.Notes, (current, tag) => current.Where(n => n.Tags.Any(t => t.Id == tag.Id)).OrderBy(n => n.Title));
I read my Notes collection from a database, using Entity Framework 4. DataStore is the custom class I use to manage my EF4 connection; it holds the EF4 ObjectContext as a property.
Why do I get the error:
Unable to create a constant value of type 'Closure type'. Only
primitive types (for instance Int32, String and Guid) are supported in
this context.
When I try to enumerate the following Linq query?
IEnumerable<string> searchList = GetSearchList();
using (HREntities entities = new HREntities())
{
var myList = from person in entities.vSearchPeople
where upperSearchList.All( (person.FirstName + person.LastName) .Contains).ToList();
}
Update:
If I try the following just to try to isolate the problem, I get the same error:
where upperSearchList.All(arg => arg == arg)
So it looks like the problem is with the All method, right? Any suggestions?
It looks like you're trying to do the equivalent of a "WHERE...IN" condition. Check out How to write 'WHERE IN' style queries using LINQ to Entities for an example of how to do that type of query with LINQ to Entities.
Also, I think the error message is particularly unhelpful in this case because .Contains is not followed by parentheses, which causes the compiler to recognize the whole predicate as a lambda expression.
I've spent the last 6 months battling this limitation with EF 3.5 and while I'm not the smartest person in the world, I'm pretty sure I have something useful to offer on this topic.
The SQL generated by growing a 50 mile high tree of "OR style" expressions will result in a poor query execution plan. I'm dealing with a few million rows and the impact is substantial.
There is a little hack I found to do a SQL 'in' that helps if you are just looking for a bunch of entities by id:
private IEnumerable<Entity1> getByIds(IEnumerable<int> ids)
{
string idList = string.Join(",", ids.ToList().ConvertAll<string>(id => id.ToString()).ToArray());
return dbContext.Entity1.Where("it.pkIDColumn IN {" + idList + "}");
}
where pkIDColumn is your primary key id column name of your Entity1 table.
BUT KEEP READING!
This is fine, but it requires that I already have the ids of what I need to find. Sometimes I just want my expressions to reach into other relations and what I do have is criteria for those connected relations.
If I had more time I would try to represent this visually, but I don't so just study this sentence a moment: Consider a schema with a Person, GovernmentId, and GovernmentIdType tables. Andrew Tappert (Person) has two id cards (GovernmentId), one from Oregon (GovernmentIdType) and one from Washington (GovernmentIdType).
Now generate an edmx from it.
Now imagine you want to find all the people having a certain ID value, say 1234567.
This can be accomplished with a single database hit with this:
dbContext context = new dbContext();
string idValue = "1234567";
Expression<Func<Person,bool>> expr =
person => person.GovernmentID.Any(gid => gid.gi_value.Contains(idValue));
IEnumerable<Person> people = context.Person.AsQueryable().Where(expr);
Do you see the subquery here? The generated sql will use 'joins' instead of sub-queries, but the effect is the same. These days SQL server optimizes subqueries into joins under the covers anyway, but anyway...
The key to this working is the .Any inside the expression.
I have found the cause of the error (I am using Framework 4.5). The problem is, that EF a complex type, that is passed in the "Contains"-parameter, can not translate into an SQL query. EF can use in a SQL query only simple types such as int, string...
this.GetAll().Where(p => !assignedFunctions.Contains(p))
GetAll provides a list of objects with a complex type (for example: "Function"). So therefore, I would try here to receive an instance of this complex type in my SQL query, which naturally can not work!
If I can extract from my list, parameters which are suited to my search, I can use:
var idList = assignedFunctions.Select(f => f.FunctionId);
this.GetAll().Where(p => !idList.Contains(p.FunktionId))
Now EF no longer has the complex type "Function" to work, but eg with a simple type (long). And that works fine!
I got this error message when my array object used in the .All function is null
After I initialized the array object, (upperSearchList in your case), the error is gone
The error message was misleading in this case
where upperSearchList.All(arg => person.someproperty.StartsWith(arg)))