Switching to Lucene is only a partial solution, since full text indexing (which is used by the CONTAINS predicate) is always asynchronous. It's also possible to configure Lucene indexing to be fully asynchronous (like SOLR), although if the target Alfresco server is under your control this may not be an issue in your case. The MDQ capability in 4.2+ is a better choice, if you're able to stick to MDQ-compatible queries.
Generally speaking this is not a problem in practice, provided one Is aware of the behaviour and adjusts for it (e.g. by not assuming query is transaction ally consistent, by using folder listing / path or id lookups wherever possible, etc.). Cheers, Peter Apologes for speling & gramar erorrs - sent from mobil deivce > On Aug 12, 2014, at 2:40 AM, "Sebastian Danninger" > <sebastian.dannin...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Hi Joshy, > > try to change Alfresco to Lucene indexing instead of Solr then you wont > have the delay. We had exactly the same problem. > > This URL describes it almost (some files that you should delete are not > available): > http://deepak-keswani.blogspot.co.at/2012/12/how-to-disable-solr-enable-lucene-on.html > > all the best > > Sebastian > > > 2014-08-12 11:00 GMT+02:00 Joshy Augustine <joshymaugust...@gmail.com>: > >> Hi Peter, >> >> Many thanks for your reply. Based on your explanation, I did some more >> experiments. I think the results prove that you are right. >> >> 1) I put a breakpoint just before session.query(), then used CMIS workbench >> to verify that the query returned results, then stepped over the >> breakpoint. I found that session.query() now returned correct results. >> >> 2) Your explanation of the issue and the above experiment seemed to suggest >> that, if I add more time between adding documents to a folder and execution >> of the query, probably it should return correct results. By trial and error >> I found that if I add 20 seconds between adding of a document and execution >> of the query via Open CMIS API, I get the correct results 10 out of 10 >> trials. >> >> I assume the above behaviour(ie, alfresco asynchronous indexing causing >> incorrect query results for a very short period of time) is not an issue in >> real-world situations? Or is there any way to address this? >> >> Thanks, >> Joshy >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Peter Monks <peter.mo...@alfresco.com> >> wrote: >> >>> G’day Josh, >>> >>> One thing to watch out for with Alfresco is that query is “eventually >>> consistent” - indexing of new / updated content is done asynchronously >> and >>> those indexes are used by the query engine. As of Alfresco 4.2 there’s a >>> metadata query capability< >>> http://wiki.alfresco.com/wiki/Alfresco_Community_4.2#Metadata_Query> [1] >>> that can be enabled to allow some (but not all) queries to be run in a >>> transactionally consistent fashion, although note that the query below >>> doesn’t meet the requirements to be executed as a metadata query (due to >>> the LIKE and IN_TREE clauses). >>> >>> That said, if this were indeed Alfresco’s eventually consistent behaviour >>> I would expect both your client application and the CMIS Workbench to >>> exhibit the same (or similar) results. The indexes are a global >> resource, >>> so it’s difficult to imagine a case where the two clients would continue >> to >>> return inconsistent results for a lengthy period of time (unless, of >>> course, you’re authenticated as different users - then it could be >>> explained by ACLs). >>> >>> At this point it’s hard to tell where the issue might lie (OpenCMIS vs >>> custom code vs CMIS Workbench vs Alfresco server), so I’ve cc’ed the >>> alfresco-technical-discussion google group - hopefully between the two >>> groups we’ll be able to narrow down the possibilities. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Peter >>> >>> [1] http://wiki.alfresco.com/wiki/Alfresco_Community_4.2#Metadata_Query >>> >>> >>> On 2014-08-11, at 9:13 AM, Joshy Augustine <joshymaugust...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:joshymaugust...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I am a newbie to Open CMIS. I am very fascinated by Open CMIS framework >>> that allowed me to write(almost in no time) a sample test program that >>> interacts with a various ECM Vendors. However, I am encountering a >> strange >>> issue with Alfresco and wondered whether any of you had the time to help? >>> >>> In the sample code I am developing, I perform the following actions >>> >>> 1) Create a Folder in Alfresco >>> 2) Add a few documents to it >>> 3) Search (via CMIS Query) for the list of documents in a folder tree >> that >>> matches with search criteria. >>> >>> In step 3, I execute the following API >>> >>> >>> ItemIterable<QueryResult> queryResult = session.query(complete_statement, >>> *false*,operationContext); >>> >>> Iterator<QueryResult> iterator = queryResult.iterator(); >>> >>> *while* (iterator.hasNext()) >>> >>> { >>> >>> QueryResult qr = (QueryResult) iterator.next(); >>> >>> String id = (String) qr.getPropertyByQueryName("cmis:objectId" >>> ).getFirstValue()); >>> >>> } >>> >>> that results in the following query being executed. >>> >>> *SELECT cmis:objectId FROM cmis:document WHERE cmis:name like 'Hello >> Wor%' >>> AND IN_TREE('c4714b61-2800-4995-8e37-2cc07549d4b2') ORDER BY >>> cmis:creationDate desc* >>> When I run the test program, most of the times, this query does not >> return >>> any results. If i put a breakpoint in the line session.query() and >> execute >>> the statement using CMIS Workbench, I am able to find results. >>> Sometimes(but not always) even putting a Thread.sleep() before >>> session.query() allows me to find the documents that query should have >>> found. >>> >>> >>> Any idea what is the best way to debug this issue? >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Josh >> >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> Josh >>
