feat: support search weight configuration for slug fields #7852
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Co-authored-by: Espen Hovlandsdal <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
1 Skipped Deployment
|
|
No changes to documentation |
|
Component Testing Report Updated Nov 20, 2024 2:32 PM (UTC) ❌ Failed Tests (1) -- expand for details
|
⚡️ Editor Performance ReportUpdated Wed, 20 Nov 2024 14:34:43 GMT
Detailed information🏠 Reference resultThe performance result of
🧪 Experiment resultThe performance result of this branch
📚 Glossary
|
juice49
force-pushed
the
fix/sapp-34/slug-field-weights
branch
from
8e419cb
to
6d3653d
Compare
juice49
changed the title
juice49
force-pushed
the
fix/sapp-34/slug-field-weights
branch
from
6d3653d
to
6cc7b43
Compare
RitaDias
reviewed
Nov 21, 2024
| const isSearchConfiguration = (options: unknown): options is SearchConfiguration => | ||
| isRecord(options) && 'search' in options && isRecord(options.search) | ||
|
|
||
| function isSchemaType(input: SchemaType | CrossDatasetType | undefined): input is SchemaType { | ||
| return typeof input !== 'undefined' && 'name' in input | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| function getFullyQualifiedPath(schemaType: SchemaType, path: string): string { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe we need to add a comment or maybe change the name? I'm just not sure what "fully qualified" would mean in this context 🥲
Could it be simplified to getFullPath or something similar?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or, since it seems to just be used when the field is a Slug as per line 83 maybe make it related to that? 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a good point. "Fully qualified name" lives in my brain for some reason, so it's intuitive for me. But I understand it may not be for everybody.
In this case, I think it makes sense. A selected path may point to a slug field, but the fully qualified path for searching and weighting is the field located at slug.current.
In a different branch, this function also automatically converts references the user has defined using dot notation e.g. some.reference.field becomes some.reference->field.
I think there is a some nuance between "full path" and "fully qualified path" but I am open to changing it. What do you think? 🙂
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
options.search.weightoption. It was previously not permitted by the types, nor had any impact if set.sourcefield, resulting in slightly smaller search queries. Matching only occurs on the slug object'scurrentfield.Global Search Example
Imagine two different document types:
bookcontains atitlefield that is implicitly given a weight of10because it's selected as the list preview title.authorcontains aslugfield that is explicitly given a weight of1_000via theoptions.search.weightoption.nextfix/sapp-34/slug-field-weightsnextfix/sapp-34/slug-field-weightsBoth
book.titleandauthor.slugcontain an exact match for the term"xoxoxo". With the changes introduced in this branch, the weighting set forauthor.slugis respected, and the author document is therefore recognised as more relevant than the book document.What to review
options.search.weighton a slug (or slug-based/aliased) field.Testing
packages/sanity/src/core/search/common/__tests__/deriveSearchWeightsFromType.test.ts.Notes for release
It's now possible to configure search weights for slug fields using the
options.search.weightfield option:defineField({ name: 'slug', type: 'slug', + options: { + search: { + weight: 50, + }, + }, }),The slug field's weight will now be respected when using global search with "Best match" sorting selected, and when using reference search.