Added new section into docs: http://apacheignite.gridgain.org/v1.3/docs/cache-queries#section-performance-and-usability-considerations
Feel free comment. Sergi 2015-08-05 11:15 GMT+03:00 Sergi Vladykin <[email protected]>: > Dmitriy, > > No problem, will do. > > Sergi > > 2015-08-04 21:56 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected]>: > >> Sergey, >> >> Having array-based queries is a very nice "secret" feature :) I actually >> was not aware of it. >> >> Do you mind updating the documentation? Basically, just put some >> explanation and the example you have in this thread into the Sql Query >> section here: >> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/cache-queries#sql-queries >> >> D. >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Sergi Vladykin <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> I know that it is a common misconception, but we use H2 database engine >>> to process SQL queries, their position on the issue is that they don't want >>> to support that until other databases do the same. Do you know any >>> databases that support such a syntax? >>> >>> Also there is another more effective workaround which opposite to IN >>> operator can use indexes and supports variable length arrays: >>> >>> >>> >>> *select p._val from Person p, table(name varchar = ?) n where p.name >>> <http://t.id> = n.name <http://z.id>* >>> and pass there array of names (String[]) as a parameter, but here you >>> have to use SqlFieldsQuery. >>> >>> Sergi >>> >>> >>> 2015-08-04 17:44 GMT+03:00 Mirko Raner <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> Thank you, Sergi. >>>> That's exactly what we did wrong! >>>> I can see some issues with this solution when there is a large number >>>> of set >>>> elements. Also, as you mentioned that it's a common issue, I'm >>>> wondering if >>>> it would make sense for Ignite to support the "IN ?" syntax with an >>>> array or >>>> collection as argument (either by translating it to the correct syntax >>>> under >>>> the hood, or by providing a predefined SQL function for this case?). >>>> Apparently, we are not the only ones who expected the "IN ?" syntax to >>>> work. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> View this message in context: >>>> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/SQL-IN-Operator-tp779p812.html >>>> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>> >>> >>> >> >
