Thanks for prodding me on this. It's a perfect opportunity to advertise an upcoming feature that addresses this exact problem.

SQL collations have existed for a long while, but as Robert pointed out, were restricted to playing with upper/lower case, truncation, whitespace and the odd numeric ploy through a limited set of built-in collations. Later this year, we'll release a more generic %COLLATE() option that allows you to combine these properties any way you like, including a translation that removes all accents (both as a SQL collation option and a new $zconvert() option).

In the meantime, you can use the somewhat impractical workarounds described above, or possibly use an iFind index and specify a TRANSFORMATIONSPEC that removes the accents.

Yes it does. I don't have time to turn this into an easy zpm-compatible module right away, but the following commands worked fine for me on IRIS, after cloning the github repo:

do $system.OBJ.ImportDir("/path/to/downloaded/isc-iknow-setanalysis","*.xml","c",,1)

do ##class(Demo.SetAnalysis.Utils).CreateRestWebApp()

The first command may throw a few errors for some BI-related things that no longer seem to work out-of-the-box, but the core app works just fine after running the above two lines. You can access it the URL described in the article above.

IRIS will automatically create an auto-incrementing RowID and leverage it as the IdKey for you, so unless you want anything other than the default, you shouldn't define such a field or index explicitly. 

If all you want is control the name, take a look at the SqlRowIdName class parameter. If you need control over its behaviour, what you've set up is appropriate and you can leverage SqlRowIdPrivate to get rid of the default additional projection of the RowID. However, unless there's a good reason for controlling the IdKey, you should try to avoid overriding it as it may deprive you of certain practical features and efficiencies such as bitmap indices and an extent index.

How do you define "first 12 beds"? Is that based on some identifier or other field in the database? Otherwise %VID may help you.

FWIW: We're currently working on a more comprehensive implementation of window functions and ROW_NUMBER(), but that'll be for a release probably around this summer.

the Find() one implements the %SQL.AbstractFind interface is the longhand (opposite of shorthand :-) ) for what search_index() does in your %FIND predicate. The Rank() function is documented in the class ref

  • It does not seem to be aware of the index so index parameters would be missed as only INDEXOPTION can be passed.

hmm, that shouldn't happen. if you could file a reproducible test case through our internal systems, we'll take a look. Or perhaps you didn't use the implicitly-generated [package name].[table name]_[index name]Highlight() procedure?

You can expose this information through setting the IFINDMAPPINGS parameter to 1:

  • [class_name]_[index_name]_WordRec: stores which words appear in each record in this index. See also %iFind.Index.AbstractWordRec.
  • [class_name]_[index_name]_WordSpread: stores the total number of records in which this word appears in this index. See also %iFind.Index.AbstractWordSpread.
  • [class_name]_[index_name]_WordPos stores which word occurs at which position in a record, so it can be joined to the AttributePos table. See also

So by doing a COUNT() on the WordPos table, you should find what you're looking for IFF it corresponds to an actual word. If you're using wildcards, you might combine with %iFind.FindWords() as a TVF, but that'd still be looking for individual words only:

SELECT COUNT(*) 
FROM Test_IFind.IFind_IF_WordPos 
WHERE WordId IN (SELECT WordId FROM %iFind.FindWords('ab*'))

If you want to count any kind of match, your highlight trick is probably the nicest way to get at it.

(as an aside: with the introduction of the %iFind.Index.Minimal index type in 2020.1, which BTW was Eduard's suggestion ;-), it seems the class reference for the IFINDMAPPINGS projections added by the .Basic class but not in .Minimal got lost. We'll fix that shortly!)

Thanks for the reference. That's indeed a very good approach to solve the international-exact-sort question through NLS collations (see also this note). The new SQL collation described above is meant to provide an easy way to have an international-broad-brush transformation to accommodate the non-exact cases, such as using a LIKE operator that doesn't trip over a single-accent difference.