SYN-10419: unified Storm lookup mode, search, and scrape combined#4874
Open
MichaelSquires wants to merge 7 commits intosynapse-3xxfrom
Open
SYN-10419: unified Storm lookup mode, search, and scrape combined#4874MichaelSquires wants to merge 7 commits intosynapse-3xxfrom
MichaelSquires wants to merge 7 commits intosynapse-3xxfrom
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## synapse-3xx #4874 +/- ##
============================================
Coverage 96.22% 96.23%
============================================
Files 259 259
Lines 63206 63216 +10
============================================
+ Hits 60823 60833 +10
Misses 2383 2383
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
invisig0th
requested changes
Apr 9, 2026
Contributor
|
This PR is looking solid. Have we ( especially anybody who has touched synapse-search ) gotten a chance to think through the "remove the scrape values" vs not idea? It does seem like there could be some that would actually match full text search, like |
synapse/datamodel.py - Added self._lookup_hints = None cache attribute to Model.__init__() - Added getLookupHints() method that collects (prop_full_name, cmpr) tuples from: - Forms whose type has modes.lookup in its info (covers entity:name, it:softwarename) - Props that directly have modes.lookup in prop.info (covers syn:tag:base) - Added self._lookup_hints = None cache invalidation in addForm, delForm, _addFormProp, and delFormProp synapse/lib/ast.py (Lookup.run()) - Replaced the search interface block with hint-based lookups: for each remainder token, iterate through getLookupHints() and lift nodes via view.nodesByPropValu() with the specified comparator - Deduplication via s_spooled.Set is preserved - Bad value/comparator exceptions per-prop are caught and skipped gracefully synapse/cortex.py - Removed storm:interface:search config Tests, docs, changelog — updated to reflect the new behavior.
Cisphyx
reviewed
Apr 13, 2026
Cisphyx
reviewed
Apr 13, 2026
Comment on lines
+303
to
+313
| async with await s_spooled.Set.anit(dirn=view.core.dirn, cell=view.core) as buidset: | ||
|
|
||
| todo = s_common.todo('search', tokns) | ||
| async for (prio, buid) in view.mergeStormIface('search', todo): | ||
| if buid in buidset: | ||
| await asyncio.sleep(0) | ||
| continue | ||
| for tokn in remainder.split(): | ||
| for prop_name, cmpr in hints: | ||
| try: | ||
| async for node in view.nodesByPropValu(prop_name, cmpr, tokn): | ||
| if node.buid in buidset: | ||
| await asyncio.sleep(0) | ||
| continue | ||
|
|
||
| await buidset.add(node.buid) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| async with await s_spooled.Set.anit(dirn=view.core.dirn, cell=view.core) as buidset: | |
| todo = s_common.todo('search', tokns) | |
| async for (prio, buid) in view.mergeStormIface('search', todo): | |
| if buid in buidset: | |
| await asyncio.sleep(0) | |
| continue | |
| for tokn in remainder.split(): | |
| for prop_name, cmpr in hints: | |
| try: | |
| async for node in view.nodesByPropValu(prop_name, cmpr, tokn): | |
| if node.buid in buidset: | |
| await asyncio.sleep(0) | |
| continue | |
| await buidset.add(node.buid) | |
| async with await s_spooled.Set.anit(dirn=view.core.dirn, cell=view.core) as nidset: | |
| for tokn in remainder.split(): | |
| for prop_name, cmpr in hints: | |
| try: | |
| async for node in view.nodesByPropValu(prop_name, cmpr, tokn): | |
| if node.nid in nidset: | |
| await asyncio.sleep(0) | |
| continue | |
| await nidset.add(node.nid) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can use nid rather than buid here
Cisphyx
reviewed
Apr 13, 2026
| offset = info.get('offset') | ||
| if match is None or offset is None: | ||
| continue | ||
| remainder = remainder[:offset] + remainder[offset + len(match):] |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it be better to remove up to the next whitespace/end of line rather than potentially removing partial tokens? Seems like prefix matching on a partial string that was leftover might not be ideal
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
No description provided.