Do not attempt matching unset fields on DateQuery #2215
Merged
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
Add a comparison at DateQuery.match in order to avoid comparing if the field is not in the item. Revise the existing types_plugin unit tests for explicitely checking the behaviour when the values are unset.
|
Yes; this looks like exactly the cause! And your fix looks right to. Please feel free to merge (but please do add a quick note to the changelog). |
sampsyo
approved these changes
Oct 3, 2016
|
Thanks for the quick review - merging it is, then! |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
On a attempt to fix #1938, it seems that the problem is actually caused by
DateQuery.matchbeing reached for an item that does not have a value set for thefieldto be compared? I could reproduced it by using just thetypesplugin:and simply:
I have added a check that returns
False(basically copying the one inNumericQuery.match), and adjusted some unit tests to catch the situation. I still have not tested specifically withmpdstats, as I'm not really an user of that particular plugin, but it seems it would fix the problem?