Some more client feedback on the query DSL/functionality. Begin forwarded message:
>> Thanks for sending this through. We have a few suggestions around >> functionality that we've found very useful in the past, but otherwise it >> looks promising. >> >> 1. Query on keys or portion of keys >> >> 2. Ability to query on unindexed attributes We had this in mind, but I don't think this functionality will make it in the first release (ISPN 6.0)/ >> >> 3. the ability to specify a custom filter is potentially useful to implement >> missing or business logic, although in practice you may be able to construct >> these with the given filters. >> Example: Filter out currency values older than X if the time is between 10am >> and 11am something to consider. >> >> 4. The ability to specify a custom extractor which could be used to extract >> a portion of stored data or manipulate it before comparison. >> Example : data is being stored as an array and we're interested in the Nth >> value in the array -> this is a requirement from a previous project >> >> 5. equality and range filters should also include the "andEquals" options: >> lessThanEquals, greaterThanEquals +1 >> >> 6. all(List) and any(List) functions are easier to use than chaining >> together and() and or() statements +1 >> >> 7. I'd suggest with() rather than having() as this is closer to SQL syntax, >> which has a different meaning for HAVING >> >> Do queries require that the entire object be deserialised before the filter >> can be evaluated or do you compare on deserialised index values? >> This is potentially quite slow, and requires that matching Java classes are >> provided on the server side even if the client is .NET >> >> Rob >> >> Cheers, -- Mircea Markus Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org)
_______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
