Hi Scott,

it will hopefully turn out to be a side-effect of issue #2422 (
which will be fixed in 3.1.18 (the next release).
It would be very helpful if you could try that release when it comes out. I 
expect it to be released this week.
Best regards

Am Mittwoch, 19. April 2017 18:31:01 UTC+2 schrieb Scott B.:
> Jan,
> Thanks for the reply.  I have the issue on three different ArangoDB 
> servers, all running on Ubuntu 16.04 LTS.
> If you don't see the issue, then I'm beginning to suspect it is caused by 
> some weird edge case, perhaps in our data.  I've sent you a few attachments 
> and a more detailed explanation that might help narrow down the issue.
> This isn't a critical issue for us (hash indexes work fine for now), just 
> very strange.
> Scott
> On Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 5:53:53 AM UTC-6, Jan wrote:
>> Hi Scott,
>> I just tried creating a persistent index via the web UI. The index was on 
>> field "arrayName[*].propertyName" as suggested by you.
>> The index was actually created and it seems to work for me. The type of 
>> the index is also "persistent" when I look at the index in detail later.
>> I am using 3.1.17 with the latest changes from the 3.1 branch that have 
>> not been released yet.
>> As it seems to work there, I suspect the issue you are seeing is caused 
>> by the same issue as reported here: 
>> https://github.com/arangodb/arangodb/issues/2422
>> Note that this issue has been fixed in 3.1.18, which will be released 
>> soon.
>> Best regards
>> Jan
>> Am Donnerstag, 13. April 2017 23:36:29 UTC+2 schrieb Scott B.:
>>> Using the ArangoDB web UI, I used to be able to create persistent 
>>> indexes on the properties of arrays by using: arrayName[*].propertyName
>>> However, now (in 3.1.17) that no longer appears to actually create a 
>>> persistent index.  It has been a while since I've modified indexes, so I'm 
>>> not sure which version I last used when it did work.  I am not marking them 
>>> as unique or sparse.
>>> However, I can still use the same notation to create a hash 
>>> (non-persistent) index.  Did something change with regard to persistent 
>>> indexes I'm unaware of, or is this a bug?

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ArangoDB" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to arangodb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to