ignite-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>
Subject Re: SQL IN Operator
Date Tue, 04 Aug 2015 18:56:41 GMT

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:


On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Sergi Vladykin <sergi.vladykin@gmail.com>

> 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 <mirko@raner.ws>:
>> 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.

View raw message