Copilot commented on code in PR #3039:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hugegraph/pull/3039#discussion_r3342425893
##########
hugegraph-server/hugegraph-core/src/main/java/org/apache/hugegraph/traversal/optimize/TraversalUtil.java:
##########
@@ -181,6 +204,166 @@ public static void extractHasContainer(HugeGraphStep<?,
?> newStep,
}
}
+ private static boolean followedByMatchStep(Step<?, ?> step) {
+ Step<?, ?> next = step.getNextStep();
+ while (next instanceof HasStep ||
+ next instanceof NoOpBarrierStep ||
+ next instanceof IdentityStep) {
+ next = next.getNextStep();
+ }
+ return next instanceof MatchStep;
+ }
+
+ private static boolean hasUnusableMatchPredicate(HugeGraphStep<?, ?> step,
+ HasContainerHolder
holder) {
+ HugeGraph graph = tryGetGraph(step);
+ for (HasContainer has : holder.getHasContainers()) {
+ if (!hasMatchIndexSensitivePredicate(has)) {
+ continue;
+ }
+ if (graph == null || !hasUsableMatchIndex(graph, step, has)) {
+ return true;
+ }
+ }
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ private static List<HasContainer> extractUsableHasContainers(
+ HugeGraphStep<?, ?> step, HasContainerHolder holder) {
+ List<HasContainer> extracted = new ArrayList<>();
+ HugeGraph graph = tryGetGraph(step);
+ for (HasContainer has : holder.getHasContainers()) {
+ if (!canExtractHasContainer(graph, has)) {
+ continue;
+ }
+ if (hasMatchIndexSensitivePredicate(has) &&
+ !hasUsableMatchIndex(graph, step, has)) {
+ continue;
+ }
+ if (!GraphStep.processHasContainerIds(step, has)) {
+ step.addHasContainer(has);
+ }
+ extracted.add(has);
+ }
+ return extracted;
+ }
+
+ private static boolean hasMatchIndexSensitivePredicate(HasContainer has) {
+ List<P<Object>> predicates = new ArrayList<>();
+ collectPredicates(predicates, ImmutableList.of(has.getPredicate()));
+ for (P<Object> pred : predicates) {
+ BiPredicate<?, ?> bp = pred.getBiPredicate();
+ if (bp == Compare.neq ||
+ bp == Compare.gt || bp == Compare.gte ||
+ bp == Compare.lt || bp == Compare.lte) {
+ return true;
+ }
+ }
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ private static boolean hasUsableMatchIndex(HugeGraph graph,
+ HugeGraphStep<?, ?> step,
+ HasContainer has) {
+ if (isSysProp(has.getKey())) {
+ return false;
+ }
+ if (!canExtractHasContainer(graph, has)) {
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ PropertyKey pkey;
+ try {
+ pkey = graph.propertyKey(has.getKey());
+ } catch (NotFoundException e) {
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ Collection<? extends SchemaLabel> schemaLabels = step.returnsVertex() ?
+ graph.vertexLabels() :
+ graph.edgeLabels();
+ boolean seen = false;
Review Comment:
`hasUsableMatchIndex()` can return true for `Compare.neq` predicates on
boolean properties when a secondary index exists, which can still push a `NEQ`
relation (e.g. the common `has("k")` form which is `neq(null)`) into
`ConditionQuery`. Backend index planning rejects any query that still has a NEQ
condition (`GraphIndexTransaction.matchSingleOrCompositeIndex()` short-circuits
when `query.hasNeqCondition()`), so this can reintroduce `NoIndexException`
even after this change. Consider treating `Compare.neq` as *always* unusable
for match pushdown unless it is the boolean case that
`TraversalUtil.convCompare2BooleanUserpropRelation()` rewrites into an `EQ`
relation (i.e. value is a Boolean).
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
