[DOCS-15993] [Server] Clarify whether "." in shard key is used for nested doc reference or field name literal Created: 28/Mar/23 Updated: 22/Jan/24 |
|
| Status: | Backlog |
| Project: | Documentation |
| Component/s: | manual, Server |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Task | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Johnny Shields | Assignee: | Unassigned |
| Resolution: | Unresolved | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | backlog, proactive, sharding | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Participants: | |
| Days since reply: | 42 weeks, 6 days ago |
| Description |
|
If I perform the following operation:
It is not clear whether the dots ('.') in "my.field.name" will be interpreted by the server for nested document path traversal (e.g. { my: { field: { name: "abc" }} }), or for the literal field name as per dot-dollar functionality. (The dot-dollar page does state that leading $ cannot be used in shard key names, but is ambiguous about dot.) Please kindly clarify this in the documentation; it would be good to put a note both on the shard page and the dot-dollar page. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Ashley Brown [ 13/Apr/23 ] |
|
Seems like a good idea to clarify whether all the restrictions listed under "General Restrictions" also apply to dot fields. |
| Comment by William Tan (Inactive) [ 12/Apr/23 ] |
|
Hi team, I have reverted to the customer my answer and he has requested that I post the answer here. Please comment where necessary.
"that . means embedded field and there is no way to make a field with literal . be the shard key, not could it be indexed." |