Thanks much Jeff. Yes, it is indexed using objectifys @Indexed annotation.
It seems that Amazon's Simple DB has a similar problem I've found during my
research on it. They have a ConsistentRead parameter you can pass along
with your REST selects at the expense of slower queries. I should not have
to pay for MapReduce URLFetch all my data to Amazon Simple DB
On Apr 28, 2011 5:29pm, Jeff Schnitzer <[email protected]> wrote:
A quick question - are you certain that the feedbackReceived property
is @Indexed? You must have a single property index in order for the
multi-property index to work. This might not be your issue, but it's
one thing to check.
Jeff
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 4:55 PM, John Wheeler [email protected]>
wrote:
> Just to update. I have copied all my entities over into a new HR
datastore,
> and I am having the EXACT same problems. It wasn't hard to copy the
> entities, but transfering the endpoints, and everything else has been a
> significant amount of work.
> My problem is that adding an order by clause to my query limits the
amount
> of results that are returned. I have an entity named Transaction with
the
> following index:
>
>
>
> feedbackReceived is a date. If I run this query
> SELECT * FROM Transaction
> WHERE ANCESTOR IS
>
KEY('ah5zfmhpZ2h2b2x1bWVzZWxsZXItZmVlZGJhY2twcm9yDwsSB0FjY291bnQY6cUVDA')
> The top result shows a feedbackReceived date of 2011-04-28 14:29:00
> If I run this query:
> SELECT * FROM Transaction
> WHERE ANCESTOR IS
>
KEY('ah5zfmhpZ2h2b2x1bWVzZWxsZXItZmVlZGJhY2twcm9yDwsSB0FjY291bnQY6cUVDA')
> ORDER BY feedbackReceived DESC
> the first result comes back with a date of 2011-04-11 04:49:00
> This happens if I run the query in the datastore viewer or using the
> objectify API.
> I have tried:
> - vacuuming and rebuilding indexes
> - re-putting all entities using a MapReduce job
> - copying all of my entities from a standard datastore app to a new HR
> datastore app using the database_admin module.
> I was told that since it never worked for me, that I would have to wait
for
> the bug to be fixed which is over two years old. This bug pretty much
> renders the datastore unusable for the long-term, and I don't know how
other
> apps are managing. I think Google is really having a hard time with
this,
> and they know they dropped the ball. It's a matter of damage control
from
> this point. Look at this bug report, it is quite pathetic:
>
http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?can=2&q=2481&colspec=ID%20Type%20Component%20Status%20Stars%20Summary%20Language%20Priority%20Owner%20Log&id=2481
>
> Google, I wish you would have been honest and upfront about the
semantics of
> your DS and HR DS, so I wouldn't have spent all my time and energy
building
> an application for your platform. Basically that this is a get/put only
> datastore and if you try to use any type of filtering you are screwed.
> Pissed.
> John
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> "Google App Engine" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Google App Engine" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google
App Engine" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
