I hesitate to add "oversophisticated" code to the JDBC river that collapses
without reason.

Somehow the definition should set "merge points" to control the zone of
JSON object/array growth. Maybe an extension of the bracket notation is all
that is needed.

At least, I will add extensive logging to the river so it can be traced
easily how the JSON docs are built from SQL.

Jörg



On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 3:44 PM, jrizzi1 <[email protected]> wrote:

> That sounds like good news, looking forward to that
>
> The only thing that really bothers me about the issue originally listed is
> that the _river results will collapse to JSON correctly with multiple 1:N
> relationships if i _river a smaller dataset
>
> for instance ,  if i include in my _river sql criteria like "where id <=
> 4000" , the sql results are 25k rows that get collapsed into 3000 documents
> indexed, and 1:N data is correct, at least from spot checking over 40 docs
> with multiple 1:N data
>
> It is only when i do larger sql results that some 1:N data goes missing,
> which leads me to believe that something is occurring in the bulk process ,
> right?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [email protected] wrote
> > I see the use case for building deep nested docs from JDBC river (and
> > other
> > data sources).
> >
> > In JDBC river, there are open questions about nested result sets, which
> is
> > similar.
> >
> > I have to think more about multiple SQL statements and create "merge
> > points" to construct bigger JSON from them in a natural way...
> >
> > Jörg
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:05 PM, jrizzi1 &lt;
>
> > jrizzi1@
>
> > &gt; wrote:
> >
> >> Thank you for that gist, it really helps to see a full setup like that
> >> from
> >> start to finish
> >>
> >> I had attempted originally a parent-child relationship for this data by
> >> using _parent in separate river(s), but decided to go to a  single index
> >> because when I attempted to return child information you can only return
> >> parent properties not children properties as well in the hits, and wasnt
> >> sure how to additionally query to get child property data
> >>
> >>
> >> but reality is I more than likely need to switch to this setup to retain
> >> all
> >> of my data, which is the least of all evils
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> > joergprante@
>
> >  wrote
> >> > Is this parent/child example sketching the challenge you are facing?
> >> >
> >> > https://gist.github.com/jprante/11191387
> >> >
> >> > Jörg
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:05 PM,
> >>
> >> > joergprante@
> >>
> >> >  <
> >>
> >> > joergprante@
> >>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Have you tried parent/child ?
> >> >>
> >> >> The idea is to execute has_parent queries on address type to find
> >> parent
> >> >> ID
> >> >>
> >>
> http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/query-dsl-has-parent-query.html
> >> >>
> >> >> I can prepare an example ...
> >> >>
> >> >> Jörg
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:53 PM, jrizzi1 &lt;
> >>
> >> > jrizzi1@
> >>
> >> > &gt; wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Hi Jorg,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I wanted a single ES document, i have a primary table that has
> unique
> >> >>> id's
> >> >>> and the names is a 1:N relation, and the address is  a 1:N relation
> >> >>>
> >> >>> reason being is we will need to search on names and addresses to try
> >> to
> >> >>> find
> >> >>> the unique ID for the individual so we can do further processing
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> how could I search over several indicies and merge those results
> back
> >> >>> together to give the one unique id that best matches? my initial
> test
> >> of
> >> >>> splitting these apart into different indicies is showing addresses
> >> and
> >> >>> entities littered in the same result set, i havent any idea how to
> >> get
> >> a
> >> >>> commonality between them
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> the addresses and names dont really have unique identifiers of their
> >> >>> own,
> >> >>> they are sequenced by the primary ID, example: if the primary table
> >> ID
> >> >>> is
> >> >>> '1001', and he has three addresses then the unqiue ID for those rows
> >> >>> would
> >> >>> be id='1001', sequence='1', id='1001', sequence='2', ... etc
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> View this message in context:
> >> >>>
> >>
> http://elasticsearch-users.115913.n3.nabble.com/JDBC-river-query-results-collapsing-to-JSON-issue-tp4054562p4054576.html
> >> >>> Sent from the ElasticSearch Users mailing list archive at
> Nabble.com.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >> >>> Groups
> >> >>> "elasticsearch" group.
> >> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
> >> send
> >> >>> an
> >> >>> email to
> >>
> >> > elasticsearch+unsubscribe@
> >>
> >> > .
> >> >>> To view this discussion on the web visit
> >> >>>
> >>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/1398192809993-4054576.post%40n3.nabble.com
> >> >>> .
> >> >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >> Groups
> >> > "elasticsearch" group.
> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> >> an
> >> > email to
> >>
> >> > elasticsearch+unsubscribe@
> >>
> >> > .
> >> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> >> >
> >>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAKdsXoFVBChBiNcCWFYU-WcPFnYCC1_jD1iu57ZvLwDnn-x%3DeA%40mail.gmail.com
> >> .
> >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> View this message in context:
> >>
> http://elasticsearch-users.115913.n3.nabble.com/JDBC-river-query-results-collapsing-to-JSON-issue-tp4054562p4054581.html
> >> Sent from the ElasticSearch Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >> "elasticsearch" group.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an
> >> email to
>
> > elasticsearch+unsubscribe@
>
> > .
> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
> >>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/1398197142689-4054581.post%40n3.nabble.com
> >> .
> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >>
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "elasticsearch" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to
>
> > elasticsearch+unsubscribe@
>
> > .
> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> >
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAKdsXoGuj9CnYeVvTuYtjrmb2U00seunUbCvrnEzwdojaEEOBQ%40mail.gmail.com
> .
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://elasticsearch-users.115913.n3.nabble.com/JDBC-river-query-results-collapsing-to-JSON-issue-tp4054562p4054631.html
> Sent from the ElasticSearch Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "elasticsearch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/1398260692324-4054631.post%40n3.nabble.com
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAKdsXoGbv2SqbBmXgWAgZJZ4a090yKTQFfoN_62_57nbxhC67Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to