Re: Riak Search Pagination

2015-12-21 Thread Zeeshan Lakhani
Yes. Score is the default ordering. For "ties," insertion order is the default. That order could change based on which node is replicated to first and the different coverage plan may showcase that. Zeeshan Lakhani programmer | software engineer at @basho | org. member/founder of @papers_we_l

Re: Riak Search Pagination

2015-12-21 Thread Jorge Garrido
Great!! But can you explain why this issue? On Monday, December 21, 2015, Zeeshan Lakhani wrote: > Best to provide a specific sort ordering on a field if you can. > > Zeeshan Lakhani > programmer | > software engineer at @basho | > org. member/founder of @papers_we_love | > twitter => @zeeshanla

Re: Riak Search Pagination

2015-12-21 Thread Zeeshan Lakhani
Best to provide a specific sort ordering on a field if you can. Zeeshan Lakhani programmer | software engineer at @basho | org. member/founder of @papers_we_love | twitter => @zeeshanlakhani > On Dec 21, 2015, at 21:54, Garrido wrote: > > No, we don’t provide a sort on the query, let us chec

Re: Riak Search Pagination

2015-12-21 Thread Garrido
No, we don’t provide a sort on the query, let us check and we can tell you if its the same score, but, in case of search returns the same score, which one will be the solution? > On Dec 21, 2015, at 8:21 PM, Zeeshan Lakhani wrote: > > The coverage plan can change per query. Are you providing

Re: Riak Search Pagination

2015-12-21 Thread Zeeshan Lakhani
The coverage plan can change per query. Are you providing a sort on the query? If not or if by score, does each item return the same score? Zeeshan Lakhani programmer | software engineer at @basho | org. member/founder of @papers_we_love | twitter => @zeeshanlakhani > On Dec 21, 2015, at 18:3

Re: Riak Search Pagination

2015-12-21 Thread Garrido
M > To: Bryan Hunt > Cc: riak-users@lists.basho.com > Subject: Re: Riak Search Pagination > > Solr (2.x), >> On Dec 21, 2015, at 7:08 PM, Bryan Hunt wrote: >> >> In the context of Solr (2.x), legacy (1.4), or secondary indexes (2i) >> (1.x+)? >> >> &

Re: Riak Search Pagination

2015-12-21 Thread Bryan Hunt
ation ?   Original Message   From: Garrido Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 1:09 AM To: Bryan Hunt Cc: riak-users@lists.basho.com Subject: Re: Riak Search Pagination Solr (2.x), > On Dec 21, 2015, at 7:08 PM, Bryan Hunt wrote: > > In the context of Solr (2.x), legacy (1.4), or secondary ind

Re: Riak Search Pagination

2015-12-21 Thread Garrido
Solr (2.x), > On Dec 21, 2015, at 7:08 PM, Bryan Hunt wrote: > > In the context of Solr (2.x), legacy (1.4), or secondary indexes (2i) (1.x+)? > > > Original Message > From: Garrido > Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 11:36 PM > To: riak-users@lists.basho

Re: Riak Search Pagination

2015-12-21 Thread Bryan Hunt
In the context of Solr (2.x), legacy (1.4), or secondary indexes (2i) (1.x+)?    Original Message   From: Garrido Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 11:36 PM To: riak-users@lists.basho.com Subject: Riak Search Pagination Hello, Recently we migrated our Riak nodes to another network, so we backup

Riak Search Pagination

2015-12-21 Thread Garrido
Hello, Recently we migrated our Riak nodes to another network, so we backup the data and then regenerate the ring, all is well, but there is a strange behaviour in a riak search, for example if we execute a query using the riak_erlang_client, returns the objects in the order: A, B, C And the