In Xml:
<field name="percent_completion" avg="Avg. of Completion"/>
I used 'avg' but It does not show the average value on bottom of column.
Am also tried in python ,
percent_completion = fields.Integer('% Completion',group_operator = "avg")
how I find the average of the column in tree view.
by usign the Solr7.5.0 webUI, I am trying to sort a field of my schema "data_creazione", by setting:
&fl=data_creazione:[2017-11-12T00:00:00Z TO NOW]&sort=data_creazione asc
my complete query URL being:
http://localhost:8983/solr/NUR/select?fq=data_creazione:[2017-11-12T00:00:00Z%20%20TO%20%20NOW]&q=regione%20lazio&sort=data_creazione%20asc
When i inspect the results I am observing a strange and erroneous sorting behavior:
results from 0 to 9 (start=0,rows=10) are correctly ordered (from 2018-03-01 to 2018-03-02)
results from 10 to 19 (start=10,rows=10) are correctly ordered (from 2018-03-05 to 2018-03-07)
results from 20 to 29 (start=20,rows=10) are incorrectly ordered (from 2018-02-23 to 2018-03-1)
Moreover, I am trying to send the same query to Solr 7.5.0 from a .netcore2.1 application by using the Solr.net driver, and I am returned the same identical sort error.
NOTICE: when I try to query the same query but in DESCENDING 'desc' direction all things go fine. All results' pages are correctly ordered.
This error does not appear with Solr 7.2.0: ascending and descending sorting over date fields works fine
In my managed-schema the field "data_creazione" is declared this way:
<fieldType name="pdate" class="solr.DatePointField" docValues="true"/>
...
<field name="data_creazione" type="pdate" multiValued="false" indexed="false" stored="true"/>
I'm trying to remove a group element from the many2many list in the model res.groups. In particular I'm trying to remove the "Analytic Accounting" group from the Employee (implied_ids field):
<record model="res.groups" id="base.group_user">
<field name="implied_ids" eval="[(3, ref('analytic.group_analytic_accounting'))]"/>
</record>
I use the number three because I read it in this question:
(3, ID) => cut the link to the linked record with id = ID
(delete the relationship between the two objects but does not delete the target object itself)
But the element doesn't dissapear from the list. Do I need to do anything else? Am I doing it in a wrong way?
We have some documents which are indexed with a date d1 on some of the documents and d2 on others, and we want to sort on both of them depending which one os available.
sort=d1 desc, d2 desc
will sort the document with d1 seperatly for the document with d2, like this:
d1: 2014-03-12
d1: 2010-03-12
d2: 2013-03-12
d2: 2011-03-12
What we want is everything sorted like this:
d1: 2014-03-12
d2: 2013-03-12
d2: 2011-03-12
d1: 2010-03-12
Reindexing all documents with a new common field is not an option unfortunately.
The approach of Abdul to use a function is the correct approach.
But the solution of Abdul does not work for me.
I've successfully tested this.
Just add this parameter to your query:
sort=max(d1,d2) desc
As much i know, you can use Function Queries of solr. For this sort, it is something like that
sort=if((abs(ms(d1,d2)) > 0),d1,d2) desc
I have not tested it yet, but here is the helpful link which will sort out your problem.
https://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery
Sort result by date difference
Maybe you can add a copyField from d1 and d2 to dAll and then sort on dAll ?
You can check copyField informations here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Copying+Fields
As it was invoqued in this discussion, you can update your data with ConcatFieldUpdateProcessorFactory by trying something like:
<processor class="com.test.solr.update.CustomConcatFieldUpdateprocessorFactory">
<str name="field">d1</str>
<str name="field">d2</str>
<str name="dest">date</str>
<str name="delimiter"></str>
</processor>
After that, you can try to sort by your field date.
Two suggestions, one of which has already been proposed:
(1) Use copyField.
<field name="d" type="date" indexed="true" stored="true" multiValued="false"/>
<copyField source="d1" dest="d" />
<copyField source="d2" dest="d" />
Even if the d1 and d2 fields are important, you can still include them in your query, but just sort on the merged d field.
(2) Depending upon the type of your data source, you could potentially modify the query in your data-config.xml file to merge these two fields into one. In our environment, we are using Solr to index data from a MySQL instance. There are many times where data from different databases is being consolidated into Solr. This introduces a similar problem where we need to normalize data that is coming from different databases. In these situations, we often use constructs like CASE or IFNULL in our queries. I can get into more specifics if this is applicable to your situation.
I had a problem very similar to yours. In my case all documents had the "d1" and "d2" fields, and all of them had the "d1" value. The "d2" value is used to overwrite the "d1" value.
My solution for this is:
sort=map(ms(d2),0,0,ms(d1)) desc
The map(ms(d2),0,0,ms(d1)) will return the "d2" timestamp if it is not empty; if it is, the "d1" timestamp is used instead
Hope it helps someone.
I am using FetchXML and I am grouping and using count for two of the entities but the rest of the entities I don't need grouped I just need the data to be pulled down. For example this is my code:
string groupby1 = #"
<fetch distinct='false' mapping='logical' aggregate='true'>
<entity name='opportunity'>
<attribute name='name' alias='opportunity_count' aggregate='countcolumn' />
<attribute name='ownerid' alias='ownerid' groupby='true' />
<attribute name='createdon' alias='createdon' />
<attribute name='customerid' alias='customerid' />
</entity>
</fetch>";
EntityCollection groupby1_result = orgProxy.RetrieveMultiple(new FetchExpression(groupby1));
foreach (var c in groupby1_result.Entities)
{
Int32 count = (Int32)((AliasedValue)c["opportunity_count"]).Value;
string OwnerID = ((EntityReference)((AliasedValue)c["ownerid"]).Value).Name;
DateTime dtCreatedOn = ((DateTime)((AliasedValue)c["createdon"]).Value);
string CustomerName = ((EntityReference)((AliasedValue)c["customerid"]).Value).Name;
}
But I get this error:
EXCEPTION: System.ServiceModel.FaultException`1[Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.OrganizationServiceFault]: An attribute can not be requested when an aggregate operation has been specified and its neither groupby nor aggregate. NodeXml : (Fault Detail is equal to Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk.OrganizationServiceFault).
How do you use aggregates on some values and not others?
The error message is giving you the answer - this isn't possible with FetchXML. You'll need to make two FetchXML calls; one for your aggregates and one for your data.
So, there are a few things going on here. The problem isn't so much that your query is not achievable with FetchXML as it is it's not achievable in any query language, including SQL. The SQL of your FetchXML above is as follows:
SELECT ownerID, createdon, customerid
FROM dbo.Opportunity
GROUP BY ownerID
If you try to run this SQL against your database, you'd get the standard Column 'dbo.Opportunity.CreatedOn' is invalid in the select list because it is not contained in either an aggregate function or the GROUP BY clause. error, which is exactly what your exception is trying to tell you. To solve this, you need to also group by every non-aggregated column (in this case, createdon and customerid) by including the groupby='true' attribute in each respective attribute element.
Secondly, grouping by the create date of each opportunity is more or less a fruitless grouping, as opportunities are generally created on different datetimes, so this grouping would just return the whole table. Microsoft rightly recognizes this, so if you fix the grouping issue above, you will encounter another exception related to the datetime column. If you continue reading the article I'd previously shared, there is an example that address the different ways you can group by different date intervals (year, month, quarter, etc.) using the dategrouping attribute.
But, I get the feeling that even after fixing the general grouping issues, and then the dategrouping issue, the result set might still not be what you want. If it's not, it might help to post an example of a result set that you'd expect to see and then address whether FetchXML has the power to deliver that set to you.