Jan

Yes, and thanks! We would be happy to accept the patch, but for legal reasons we need you to fill out and sign our Contributor Agreement. You can scan and...

Sorry, I didn't send the link. The CLA PDF is here: https://www.arangodb.com/documents/cla.pdf

I think we're generally happy to accept the patch, but for legal reasons we need you to fill out and sign our [Contributor Agreement](https://www.arangodb.com/documents/cla.pdf). You can scan and email the...

@Virock : the separation of the query string and the so-called "bind parameters" is already possible. For example, in the ArangoShell (arangosh) you could use something like: ``` db._query("FOR doc...

@Virock : I think I don't yet get the point. Doing something like ``` db._query("FOR doc IN @@collection FILTER doc.value == @value RETURN doc", { "@collection": "foo", "value": "bar" });...

@AntoineAA @matcho: no guess why this should happen. If it happens again and queries don't return the expected results from the index, can you run the following commands on the...

Thanks. The figures reported clearly show that there is an issue. The following indexes seem to have an off-count value: ``` { "deduplicate" : false, "fields" : [ "project_id", "date_created"...

@AntoineAA : I understand, thanks. I plan to look into index deletion code tomorrow. Is it correct that the problems started to happen only after dropping some index(es) of that...

Thanks. I am about to look into the issue now. I guess it has to do with range deletions somehow, but this is just a hypothesis.

Currently trying to reproduce the problem by running this on a collection with 4M documents: ``` types = ["hash", "persistent", "skiplist"]; fields = ["name", "name.first", "name.last", "value1", "value2", "date", "values",...