-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 340
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
allow for adding custom analyzers to mapping definition #2282
base: 2.10.x
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
return $this->config['custom_search_analyzers']; | ||
} | ||
|
||
return json_decode($this->config['custom_search_analyzers'], true); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not a huge fan of having json_encoded data being set inside XML file, couldn't it be an XML array either ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
By the way, I think the xsd schema should be updated with this new config node probably.
/** | ||
* {@inheritDoc} | ||
*/ | ||
public function getCustomSearchAnalyzers() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we need some unit testing here, this file is already covered so any new method should also be.
$weightedFields = array_merge($weightedFields, $this->addWeightedFields($analyzers, $canAddField, $field, $boost)); | ||
} | ||
|
||
return $weightedFields; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We need additional test cases in unit testing to deal with the fact that we can have custom_analyzers or not.
Actually the existing tests are not failing, which is good, but there is no clue about the expected result if the field is meant to have custom_analyzers
Hi @gusdemayo this looks promising, but considering modifying this part is "high risk" (it can break mapping, change behavior of fulltext search, etc...), we need some more deep testing to ensure everything is safe, so we'll need some time internally to give it a try. In the meantime, can you have a look to the requested changes I added in my review ? Best regards |
Allow for adding analyzers to field mappings in following format