[OAK-2438] Evaluate support for must(must_not(x)) query with Lucene

• Type: Task
• Status: Closed
• Priority: Minor
• Resolution: Fixed
• Fix Version/s: 1.1.6
• Component/s: lucene
• Assignee: Chetan Mehrotra
• Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
• Created: 22/Jan/15 12:48
• Updated: 20/Apr/15 07:30
• Resolved: 23/Jan/15 06:20

Description

As part of OAK-2434 fix we are changing following logic

@Override
            public boolean visit(FullTextAnd and) {
                BooleanQuery q = new BooleanQuery();
                for (FullTextExpression e : and.list) {
                    Query x = getFullTextQuery(e, analyzer, reader);
                    // Lucene can't deal with "must(must_not(x))"
                    if (x instanceof BooleanQuery) {
                        BooleanQuery bq = (BooleanQuery) x;
                        for (BooleanClause c : bq.clauses()) {
                            q.add(c);
                        }
                    } else {
                        q.add(x, MUST);
                    }
                }
                result.set(q);
                return true;
            }

With a logic where the query is always added to BooleanQuery without unwrapping. This might affect logic related to comment // Lucene can't deal with "must(must_not)". Currently there is no testcase to check that condition and we are not sure how this change would affect such a check.

So need to add a testcase to document the behaviour for such cases

Issue Links

• relates to: OAK-2434 Lucene AND query with a complex OR phrase returns incorrect result