The issue explains the problems quite clearly. If we add a function COUNTER, it needs to behave in a sensible and predictable way everywhere in the query even before the final RETURN statement. And we currently do not see a way to do this efficiently. Max
Am 28. September 2018 16:15:42 MESZ schrieb carthagek...@gmail.com: >I cam across this entry: >https://github.com/arangodb/arangodb/issues/5359 > >Seems to do what I want. And the way I read it, the only real problem >with >it is when there's a large amount of documents But my use case >(displaying >of search results) limits the maximum number of documents to a >configured >amount (e.g. 10k). Anything more than that and the user will only get >the >first 10k and an information message saying they have to refine their >search criteria. > >Thoughts? > >On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 1:12:04 AM UTC-5, Max Neunhöffer >wrote: >> >> Hi, >> there are two reasons why we hesitate to offer this functionality. >One is >> the cluster, which you have mentioned. The other is that AQL >intentionally >> has no mutable state (variables) because it is a descriptive language >and >> for example does not guarantee any order in FOR statements. This >allows >> more optimizations, in particular in a distributed system. >> However, in a sense we do offer what you want, since we provide a >list of >> results. So client side, you can easily add a sequence number simply >by >> taking the index in the list. With batches you would have to keep a >total, >> but this is usually no problem at the client side. >> Furthermore, you could have a little Foxx app, which does what you >want by >> playing exactly that trick. You might have a little trouble keeping >the >> state from one batch to the next, but this could for example also be >done >> client side by having a count in the API. >> Cheers, >> Max >> >> Am 28. September 2018 05:26:00 MESZ schrieb cartha...@gmail.com >> <javascript:>: >> >Hi, >> > >> >Is there a rownum function to be able to assign a row number to >every >> >record returned from a query? >> > >> >Say I have two documents: {fname: fname1, lname: lname1} and {fname: > >> >fname2, lname: lname2} >> > >> >Is it possible to do something of the sort and get the output like >> >below? >> > >> >for d in mycoll >> >return {myrownnum: ROW_NUMBER(), fname: d.fname, lname: d.lname} >> > >> >Expected output: >> > >> >{myrownum: 0, fname: fname1, lname: lname1} >> >{myrownum: 1, fname: fname2, lname: lname2} >> > >> >I understand that it would probably not work (i.e. would give wrong >> >rownums >> >or plainly not work) in a clustered environment and that you haven't > >> >specified the shard keys completely. But I think it should b >possible >> >when >> >you hit a single shard. >> -- 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.
