I think it's better to order by empty-sequence: for $x in cts:search(...) order by () return $x
Using the profiler in cq, I can measure a small but consistent difference between this and 'order by cts:score($x)', with no change in ordering. If you do find you need cts:score, be sure to add 'descending'. -- Mike On 31 Aug 2011, at 15:00 , Mike Sokolov wrote: > I have been assuming that this: > > for $x in cts:search(...) > return some-expression-involving($x) > > is completely equivalent to this: > > for $x in cts:search(...) > order by cts:score() descending > return some-expression-involving($x) > > but is that true? > > -- > Michael Sokolov > Engineering Director > www.ifactory.com > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general > _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general
