Yes, I did, it made no difference. On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Danny Sokolsky <[email protected] > wrote:
> Did you try this with item-frequency passed in as an option to > cts:sum-aggregate? > > > > -Danny > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Lien Suandy > *Sent:* Thursday, March 05, 2015 3:49 PM > *To:* MarkLogic Developer Discussion > *Subject:* [MarkLogic Dev General] cts:sum-aggregate returned incorrect > result > > > > I'm testing the cts:sum-aggregate function on a database with 100 million > documents. There exists a range index for an element, num, I used for this > test. > > > > Evaluating this: > > > > cts:sum-aggregate(cts:element-reference(xs:QName("num"))) > > > > This returns the result > > > > ==> 832,332,413 (: commas inserted for viewing :) > > > > Since I know that num falls in the range of 1980 - 2010 and I know every > document in the collection has exactly one 'num' element. I expect the > result to be around > > > > 200,000,000,000 > > > > I also verified by running the DEPRECATED function, cts:sum > > > > cts:sum(cts:element-values(xs:QName("num"), (), ("type=int"))) > > > > The result from cts:sum is what I had expected: > > > > ==> 202,695,795,325 (: commas inserted for viewing :) > > > > I also did another test in a smaller database, here, the cts:sum-aggregate > function gave the correct result. Can someone explain? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Lien > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general > > -- Lien H. Suandy NoSQL Data Architect / Consultant - www.linkedin.com/in/liensuandy
_______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general
