Records grouping bugfix

[mathemancer]

Fixes #3742

This adds a new field to the grouping response to collect result indices.

Checklist

• My pull request has a descriptive title (not a vague title like Update index.md).
• My pull request targets the develop branch of the repository
• My commit messages follow best practices.
• My code follows the established code style of the repository.
• I added tests for the changes I made (if applicable).
• I added or updated documentation (if applicable).
• I tried running the project locally and verified that there are no
  visible errors.

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin
Version 1.1

Copyright (C) 2004, 2006 The Linux Foundation and its contributors.
1 Letterman Drive
Suite D4700
San Francisco, CA, 94129

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this
license document, but changing it is not allowed.


Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
    have the right to submit it under the open source license
    indicated in the file; or

(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
    of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
    license and I have the right under that license to submit that
    work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
    by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
    permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
    in the file; or

(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
    person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
    it.

(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
    are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
    personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
    maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
    this project or the open source license(s) involved.

[mathemancer]

@Anish9901 This PR is dependent on #3749 , and shouldn't be merged until after that one. But, it's ready for review.

[mathemancer]

@seancolsen This is probably worth a quick glance for behavior if you have time.

[Anish9901]

Looks good to me!

[seancolsen]

Structurally, this is good.

However, as far as I can tell, the result_indices was using zero-based indexing in the REST API and now is using 1-based indexing in this PR.

From an API consumer's perspective, I think 0-based indexing would be more intuitive. And it's also how the front end already expects this data to be formed. Do you think you could change it to be 0-based?

[mathemancer]

Structurally, this is good.

However, as far as I can tell, the result_indices was using zero-based indexing in the REST API and now is using 1-based indexing in this PR.

From an API consumer's perspective, I think 0-based indexing would be more intuitive. And it's also how the front end already expects this data to be formed. Do you think you could change it to be 0-based?

Hmmmmmm. I took that to be primary key values. So, that's what we're returning. Am I to understand that we were returning array indices here? That's kind of odd, but it does solve the problem with no primary keys.

[mathemancer]

Okay, I made the change. Should be the same as the old way now.

[seancolsen]

This works for me now. Thanks!

I added a small comment pertaining to documentation though. I think it would be good to fix that before merging.

[seancolsen]

"primary key values" is not accurate here.

[seancolsen]

Adding an approval review so you can merge this without an additional review from me.

[seancolsen]

Corresponding front end PR: #3755