Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

HSEARCH-809 Updating faceting API #821

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@hferentschik
Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 17, 2015

Includes fixes for:

  • HSEARCH-1600
  • HSEARCH-809
  • HSEARCH-900
  • HSEARCH-812

@hferentschik hferentschik referenced this pull request Apr 17, 2015

Closed

HSEARCH-809 #819

@Sanne

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 17, 2015

Awesome :)

Could I extract and apply things like HSEARCH-1600 separately?

@hferentschik

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 17, 2015

Could I extract and apply things like HSEARCH-1600 separately?

I am confused, HSEARCH-1600 is already separate. The faceting code has also already been reviewed in most parts. Can we not discuss this pull request as is.

@hferentschik hferentschik force-pushed the hferentschik:HSEARCH-809 branch 2 times, most recently from 6cfbf94 to 8db5c98 Apr 18, 2015

hferentschik added some commits Apr 14, 2015

HSEARCH-809 Switching to Lucene's native faceting API
- Introducing @facet, @facets and FacetEncodingType to configure facets
- Updating field metadata to keep faceting related information
- Updating AnnotationMetadataProvider to use additonal faceting metadata
- Making use of various DocsValue types in DocumentBuilderIndexedEntity to index facets
- Updating QueryHits to use Lucene's FacetCollector
- Updating Faceting DSL
- Updating faceting tests to make use of @facet
- Updating features.xml to export correct packages from faceting module
- Removing obsolete classes (FacetCollector and FacetCounter)
- Adding verification that indexed field configured for faceting is not analyzed
- Updating documentation to relfect changes in faceting API
HSEARCH-900 Adding test to show that issue is resolved by switching t…
…o dynamic faceting via Lucene's API (see HSEARCH-809)

@hferentschik hferentschik force-pushed the hferentschik:HSEARCH-809 branch from 8db5c98 to b0b43a8 Apr 18, 2015

@Sanne

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 18, 2015

I'm not understanding the Jenkins error. Documentation builds fine here..
I'll apply the commit for HSEARCH-1600 already just to get rid of the distraction, then I'll test the build of the manual again.

@hferentschik

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 19, 2015

You realize I pushed an update already? There was a problem with the docbook build (duplicate id) which I resolved. Did not show via asciidoctor. Just make sure to get the latest branch and take it from there.

@Sanne

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 19, 2015

right, thanks. I got confused as I had checked out the latest - which worked fine - just after you pushed apparently, as Jenkins finished the build marking it "green" again ten minutes later :)

@Sanne

This comment has been minimized.

not very important, but: any reason to use "Field" at singular on this method, and plural on the others?
+1 for the nice split.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner Author

replied Apr 19, 2015

No particular reason. More of an oversight/typo.

@Sanne

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 19, 2015

I'd be very eager to merge this, not only because users are asking for it but also as I'd hope to use it as a trampoline to get to Lucene 5.

The big question is IMO about the backwards compatibility change in a minor release - by our own rules we can't do that, although I guess it's debatable if requiring the new annotations is indeed an API change.

I'd really like to say it's not and apply it, but I kinda have to admit it's because I want to, and not necessarily a fair judgement. Let's talk about it on the mailing list?

A safer approach could be to start a branch 6 already.. we could make good use of that to include Lucene 5 patches and work in progress about ORM 5 as well. But it will be a long wait to actually release a 6 since we want many more breaking changes in there. Let's chat/email about it with everyone next week?

@hferentschik

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 20, 2015

IMO we can merge and make this a feature of 5.2. As you say, a lot of people are waiting for this, in particular since it also solved the *ToMany faceting issue we always had with the collector approach. And even though one needs to add new annotations, the API itself is pretty much unchanged. Waiting for Search 6 seems to long of a wait for this feature.

+1 for merging and releasing as part of 5.2

@hferentschik

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 29, 2015

What the plan on this now. IMO we should merge asap

@Sanne

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 5, 2015

I'll merge this later today, need to apply some changes before this.

@hferentschik

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 5, 2015

I'll merge this later today, need to apply some changes before this.

Ok

@Sanne

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 5, 2015

merged!

@Sanne Sanne closed this May 5, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.