I just tried similar queries and get the following output
Option1:
struct(ID:1,linkedList:[ObjectA, ObjectB])
struct(ID:1,linkedList:[ObjectA, ObjectB])
struct(ID:3,linkedList:[ObjectC, ObjectD])
struct(ID:3,linkedList:[ObjectC, ObjectD])
If I add a distinct keyword then I get only 2 rows:
struct(ID:1,linkedList:[ObjectA, ObjectB])
struct(ID:3,linkedList:[ObjectC, ObjectD])
Option2:
struct(ID:3,empd:ObjectD)
struct(ID:1,empd:ObjectA)
struct(ID:1,empty:ObjectB)
struct(ID:3,empd:ObjectC)
Adding an order by I can get them ordered by ID and empty
struct(ID:1,empd:ObjectA)
struct(ID:1,empty:ObjectB)
struct(ID:3,empty:ObjectC)
struct(ID:3,empd:ObjectD)
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 10:30 AM Jason Huynh <jhu...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> In option1, are you receiving the linked list or is it not returning the
> values at all?
> Is the problem in option1 just a display issue?
>
> For option2, you might be able to do a distinct with an order by but that
> will force uniqueness in the tupling which you may not be looking for.
>
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 6:10 AM Thacker, Dharam <
> dharam.thac...@jpmorgan.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello Team,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am unable to apply any filter conditions using OQL if collection is of
>> type LinkedList. Below query does not work as expected.
>>
>> Below query gives me dependencies grouped at service name level and array
>> of depenencies under it.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Option1:*
>>
>> select service.name, service.dependencies from /Service
>> service,service.dependancies empd where IS_DEFINED(empd.something)
>>
>>
>>
>> *Output:*
>>
>> Each row = serviceName -> {LinkedList}
>>
>>
>>
>> *Option2:*
>>
>> If I change query like below one then it gives filtered result but I
>> don’t get grouped by service name at every result comes as individual
>> element.
>>
>>
>>
>> select service.name, empd from /Service service,service.dependancies
>> empd where IS_DEFINED(empd.something)
>>
>>
>>
>> *Output:*
>>
>> Each row >>
>>
>> serviceName -> empd1
>>
>> serviceName -> empd2
>>
>> serviceName -> empd3
>>
>>
>>
>> Is there any such limitation?
>>
>> Anything we can do to achieve this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks & Regards,
>>
>> Dharam
>>
>>
>>
>> This message is confidential and subject to terms at: http://
>> www.jpmorgan.com/emaildisclaimer including on confidentiality, legal
>> privilege, viruses and monitoring of electronic messages. If you are not
>> the intended recipient, please delete this message and notify the sender
>> immediately. Any unauthorized use is strictly prohibited.
>>
>
