Hi, I am trying to get the search results of child items. Some child items are within one parent item and some child items are from another parent item. I tried to build a query using examine however I'm not getting the expected results. Any assistance would be much appreciated. The following below is what I'm trying to accomplish: var query = index.Searcher.CreateQuery("content"); var results = query.ParentId(nodeItem1Id).And().ParentId(nodeItem2Id).Execute();

With

And()

it would have to have both those ids as a parent wich is only possible if they are the same. Should probably be

Or()

instead?

for multiple or/and look at the groupedOr/groupedAnd https://github.com/Shazwazza/Examine/wiki/Grouped-Operations

So I'm looking to only get child items from two different parent nodes and combine them. I would use .parentId(nodeid) and execute that function twice to get two sets of children results and combine them afterwards but I prefer executing the query only once to get the full set.

switching and to or would do that

Or() doesn't seem to make any difference

I would write it little differently give me 2 and will send you example

I've tried the following, it still gave no results when I plucked two different node ids in the second parameter. It seems that the second parameter accepts a string[] rather than a list. Has this query been tested on umbraco version 12?

Ahhh forgot do to array 😅 it wasn't tested as it was example and this method will work in V12 as V12 uses examine 3 anyway

Is "parentId" a field in your index at all? Just a sanity check

Also string field names are case sensitive FYI

I copied parentID from v8 umbraco side, it might be something for sanity check if umbraco didnt change it in v9-v12 😂 as i had backoffice for v8 opened so checked the name of property there

In our solutions we use the path option. and specify it in a groupedOr like this: query.And().GroupedOr(new[] { "path" }, paths); where path is set with node.Path.MultipleCharacterWildcard()

@Johan R. you shouldnt use built in path tbh 😉 or wildcard in paths searching 😉

Why not?

@Johan R. you might have 2 nodes with IDs 123 and 1234 and if you search on built in field, you need make expensive match with wildcard, and you don't want do wilcards as now 123,* will match 1234 if you don't play around with query. Best is have separate field with path as separate values and do exact match

no but you can search for all items below a home node like -1,1073,*

It is expensive...

luke 4 the win 😛

If I want make my life harder yeah Luke 4 win 🤣