add support for TermSetQuery in query parser #1683

trinity-1686a · 2022-11-15T15:05:49Z

Add support for creating a TermSetQuery from the query parser with field: IN [val1 val2 val3]

codecov-commenter · 2022-11-15T15:26:37Z

Codecov Report

Merging #1683 (34601b8) into main (ca62311) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 93.63%.

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##             main    #1683    +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage   94.03%   94.04%            
========================================
  Files         256      256            
  Lines       48956    49066   +110     
========================================
+ Hits        46038    46143   +105     
- Misses       2918     2923     +5

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/query/query_parser/logical_ast.rs	`80.00% <58.82%> (-8.38%)`	⬇️
query-grammar/src/query_grammar.rs	`99.70% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)`	⬆️
query-grammar/src/user_input_ast.rs	`98.01% <100.00%> (+0.14%)`	⬆️
src/query/query_parser/query_parser.rs	`95.38% <100.00%> (+0.34%)`	⬆️
src/query/set_query.rs	`96.34% <100.00%> (+0.68%)`	⬆️
src/indexer/segment_updater.rs	`95.31% <0.00%> (-0.14%)`	⬇️
src/fastfield/multivalued/mod.rs	`98.45% <0.00%> (+0.38%)`	⬆️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

but don't support executing such query

query-grammar/src/query_grammar.rs

query-grammar/src/user_input_ast.rs

fulmicoton · 2022-11-17T12:56:37Z

src/query/query_parser/logical_ast.rs

+                for (i, element) in elements.iter().enumerate() {
+                    if i == 0 {
+                        write!(formatter, "{:?}", element)?;
+                    } else if i == MAX_DISPLAYED - 1 {


nitpick. There is a small glitch if elements.len() == MAX_DISPLAYED.

We then display (0 more)

It is not really user facing so no need to fix.

add support for TermSetQuery in query parser

34601b8

trinity-1686a requested a review from fulmicoton November 15, 2022 15:05

support parsing set without field

0b49631

but don't support executing such query