I think it might be worth differentiating the result "LIMIT" (as used in the OQL query statement like so... "SELECT * FROM /Region WHERE ... LIMIT 1000") from what is actually "streamed" back to *Gfsh* as the default (e.g. 100).
Clearly sending all the results back is quite expensive depending on the number of results/LIMIT specified. Therefore, whatever "--option" is provided to the `query` command is a further reduction in what is actually streamed back to the client (e.g. *Gfsh*) initially, sort of like paging, therefore ... `gfsh> query --query="SELECT * FROM /Region WHERE ... LIMIT 1000" --page-size=25`... perhaps? Therefore, I think having 2 limits, as in OQL LIMIT and a --limit option would just be confusing to users. LIMIT like sort (ORDER BY) can only be effectively applied to the OQL as it determines what results the query actually returns. On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Anilkumar Gingade <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Actually a really nice thing would be to put the pagination feature > into the OQL engine where it belongs. > +1 on this. > > >> if they query mode is interactive, it sends the first 20 (page-size, > not configurable) records. and user uses "n" to go to the next page, > >> once it hits the last page (showing all 1000 record or get to the end > of the result set), the command finishes. > > We could provide one more option to end user to quit getting to next page > and go-back to gfsh command for new commands (if its not there). > > I think providing multiple options to view large result set, is a nice > feature from tooling perspective (interactive result batching, dumping into > an external file, etc...) > > >> It’s fairly common in query tooling to be able to set a result set > limit. > Yes...many of the interactive query tools allow pagination/batching as > part of the result display. > > >> gfsh> query --query='select * from /A limit 10' --limit=100 > We need to make sure that user can differentiate query commands from > options provided by tool. > > -Anil. > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:56 AM, William Markito Oliveira < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> The way I read this is: One is limiting on the server side, the other is >> limiting the client side. IOW within the query string is acting on server >> side. >> >> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Jinmei Liao <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> what if user wants to do: >>> gfsh> query --query='select * from /A limit 10' --limit=100 >>> >>> What's the difference between put it inside the query string or outside? >>> I think eventually it's adding the limit clause to the query. >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Anthony Baker <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> It’s fairly common in query tooling to be able to set a result set >>>> limit. I would make this a first class option within gfsh instead of an >>>> environment variable. >>>> >>>> gfsh> set query-limit=1000 >>>> >>>> or >>>> >>>> gfsh> query --query='select * from /A’ --limit=1000 >>>> >>>> The result set limit is semantically different from specifying a LIMIT >>>> on the OQL query itself. >>>> >>>> Anthony >>>> >>>> On Jul 11, 2017, at 7:53 AM, William Markito Oliveira < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> +1 for the combination of 1 and 2 as well. It would be interesting to >>>> explore at least a couple output formats, csv being one of the most common >>>> for people that wants to import or analyze the data using other tools. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Michael Stolz <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Actually a really nice thing would be to put the pagination feature >>>>> into the OQL engine where it belongs. Clients shouldn't have to implement >>>>> pagination. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Mike Stolz >>>>> Principal Engineer, GemFire Product Manager >>>>> Mobile: +1-631-835-4771 <(631)%20835-4771> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:00 AM, Michael William Dodge < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I prefer to redirect output to a file when there is any chance that >>>>>> the results might be huge. Thus I find the combination of #1 and #2 to be >>>>>> sufficient for me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sarge >>>>>> >>>>>> > On 10 Jul, 2017, at 17:13, Jinmei Liao <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Hi, all gfsh-users, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > In our refactor week, we are trying to refactor how multi-step >>>>>> command is implemented. The currently implementation is hard to >>>>>> understand >>>>>> to begin with. The implementation breaks the OO design principals in >>>>>> multiple ways. It's not thread-safe either. This is an internal command >>>>>> type, and and only our "query" command uses it. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > This is how our current "query" command works: >>>>>> > 1) user issues a "query --query='select * from /A'" command, >>>>>> > 2) server retrieves the first 1000 (fetch-size, not configurable) >>>>>> rows, >>>>>> > 3) if the query mode is NOT interactive, it sends back all the >>>>>> result at one. >>>>>> > 4) if they query mode is interactive, it sends the first 20 >>>>>> (page-size, not configurable) records. and user uses "n" to go to the >>>>>> next >>>>>> page, once it hits the last page (showing all 1000 record or get to the >>>>>> end >>>>>> of the result set), the command finishes. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > we would like to ask how useful is this interactive feature. Is it >>>>>> critical for you? Would the following simplification be sufficient? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > 1) query command always returns the entire fetch size. We can make >>>>>> it configurable through environment variables, default to be 100, and you >>>>>> can also reset it in each individual query command using "query >>>>>> --query='select * from /A limit 10' >>>>>> > >>>>>> > 2) provide an option for you to specify a file where we can dump >>>>>> all the query result in and you can use shell pagination to list the >>>>>> content of the file. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Please let us know your thoughts/comments. Thanks! >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > -- >>>>>> > Cheers >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Jinmei >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ~/William >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Cheers >>> >>> Jinmei >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> ~/William >> > > -- -John john.blum10101 (skype)
