[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-890?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13704385#comment-13704385
]
Jukka Zitting commented on OAK-890:
-----------------------------------
bq. specialized index
Yep, I'm not suggesting that we implement something like that specifically for
this issue, just suggesting that whatever solution we come up with here should
be compatible with such an index (i.e. at least not make it harder to implement
something like that).
bq. a way to let the index know the whole fulltext condition
Right. In general I'd opt to pass as much information to the index as possible,
ideally the full abstract syntax tree of the query. An index can always opt to
ignore query parts it doesn't support or understand (assuming such parts only
restrict the set of potentially matching results), but going in the other
direction (trying to use information that's not provided) is impossible.
> Query: advanced fulltext search conditions
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-890
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-890
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: query
> Reporter: Thomas Mueller
> Assignee: Thomas Mueller
>
> Currently, the query engine does not use a fulltext index if there are
> multiple fulltext conditions combined with "or". Also, the QueryIndex
> interface does not support boosts, and does not support fulltext conditions
> on properties (just on nodes) - Filter.getFulltextConditions is a collection
> of strings, combined with "and", but does not contain the information whether
> a condition is on a property or on all properties. Also, the popular sorting
> by score (specially descending) is not currently supported.
> [~mreutegg] and me discussed how we could support those features (including
> boost) in a way that is backward compatible with Jackrabbit 2.x, but without
> adding a lot of complexity. Example Jackrabbit 2.x query:
> {code}
> /jcr:root/content//*[(@jcr:primaryType='page'
> and (jcr:contains(jcr:content/@tags, 'it:blue')
> or jcr:contains(jcr:content/@tags, '/tags/it/blue')))]
> /jcr:root/content//element(*, nt:hierarchyNode)[
> (jcr:contains(jcr:content, 'SomeTextToSearch')
> or jcr:contains(jcr:content/@jcr:title, 'SomeTextToSearch')
> or jcr:contains(jcr:content/@jcr:description, 'SomeTextToSearch'))]
> /rep:excerpt(.) order by @jcr:score descending
> {code}
> A possible solution is to extend the internal fulltext syntax to support
> those features. The internal fulltext syntax is the one used by
> Filter.getFulltextCondition (not the one used within the original XPath, SQL,
> or SQL-2 query). The proposed syntax (work in progress, just a rough draft so
> far) is:
> {code}
> FullTextSearch ::= Or
> ['order by score' [' desc']]
> Or ::= And {' OR ' And}*
> And ::= Term {' ' Term}*
> Term ::= '(' Or ')' | ['-'] SimpleTerm
> SimpleTerm ::= [Property ':'] '"' Word {' ' Word}* '"' ['^' Boost]
> Property ::= <property name>
> Boost ::= <number>
> {code}
> The idea is that the syntax matches the syntax used by Lucene (except for the
> 'order by' part), so that the Lucene and Solr index implementations should
> get simpler (only need minimal parsing, possibly just the 'order by' part).
> Search terms (phrases, words) are always within double quotes. That means,
> the above queries would result in the following condition:
> {code}
> jcr:content/tags:"it:blue"
> OR jcr:content/tags:"/tags/it/blue"
> jcr:content/*:"SomeTextToSearch"
> OR jcr:content/jcr:title:"SomeTextToSearch"
> OR jcr:content/jcr:description:"SomeTextToSearch"
> order by score desc
> {code}
> It would also allow to switch back from
> {code}
> Collection<String> getFulltextConditions()
> {code}
> to
> {code}
> String getFulltextCondition()
> {code}
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
