Den 27-09-2015 kl. 12:16 skrev Paul Merlin: > Niclas Hedhman a écrit : >> You are bringing up a lot of details, and I simply don't have time to >> investigate the details right now. I will try to remember to revisit this >> at a later date. >> >> One thing is known; The RDF implementation does the right thing, the SQL >> implementation doesn't. >> >> Why is that? I am not sure. But the intent is that the Query implementation >> needs to take the "view position" of the caller, not its own location in >> the Structure. I think this is what SQL impl is failing, and had to >> introduce the hack of a type finder (can't recall the exact name). >> >> It could be that it is this reason, why the Query impl looks complex, and I >> am not able to comment on whether this can be simplified or not. I just >> hope we won't do the same mistake as 2nd generation of our >> Persistence/Indexing/Query system, where everything ended up "wrong" in >> terms of visibility. > That's the ElasticSearch index/query that does the wrong thing regarding > visibility, not the SQL one. The SQL one is complex because of, well, SQL. I guess that we could really use some more multi-module testcases hitting those indexers.
/Kent
