Fixed it.

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:13 AM, John Wheeler <[email protected]>wrote:

> Ok guys makes perfect sense and jives with my removal of @Indexed halfway
> through the development of my project, which I did do. I only did that
> because I read this in the objectify documentation, and I was cruft cutting
>
> "By default, all entity fields except Text and Blob are indexed. You can
> control this behavior with @Indexed and @Unindexed annotations on fields
> or classes:"
>
> http://code.google.com/p/objectify-appengine/wiki/IntroductionToObjectify
>
> Maybe I misinterpret something somewhere, but either way I am glad I won't
> have to switch to simple DB. I will do the mapreduce putting
>
> John
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Alfred Fuller <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Found the problem. The entities that don't show up have the 
>> "feedbackReceived"
>> property marked as unindexed. The entities that do show up have 
>> "feedbackReceived"
>> marked as indexed. This is what I believe happened:
>>
>> feedbackReceived not marked with @Indexed
>> Put some entities
>> @Indexed added to feedbackReceived
>> Put some other entities
>>
>> In this case the first set of entities will not show up in any query.
>> Switching a property from unindexed -> indexed is technically a 'schema
>> change' as entities that were previously Put will not automatically switch
>> the property to being indexed. You must Get then re-Put each entity with the
>> property marked as indexed to have it show up (the Map framework is very
>> useful when trying to do this).
>>
>> The copy MR does not know about your schema so it just copies the data
>> directly (keeping the original indexed or unindexed state).
>>
>> We have filed a bug internally to make the indexed or unindexed state of a
>> property more obvious in the admin console.
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 10:27 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> It is highvolumeseller-feedbackpro
>>>
>>> the regular version is highvolumeseller
>>>
>>> If you can get it to work with the regular version, that would be great
>>> because it is sufficient for my needs and I prefer the cost model of the
>>> regular version. if you can only get it working with HR DS, I'll take what I
>>> can get
>>>
>>> thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 29, 2011 10:18am, Alfred Fuller <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> > What is the app id of the High Replication version of your app?
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:55 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.
>>>
>>
>>  --
>> 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.

Reply via email to