Uploaded image for project: 'eZ Publish / Platform'
  1. eZ Publish / Platform
  2. EZP-25088

Content items not indexed by legacySearchEngine

    Details

      Description

      Steps to reproduce:

      1. Install a master version without legacy;

      2. Import the attached bundle and register it on EzPublishKernel.php and on routing.yml;

      3. With the bundle working, from the ezpublish root, run the following command:

      php ezpublish/console test:testSearch footer
      

      You should get:

      Found: footer
      Execution terminated.
      

      4. Now, via platformUI, create a folder "folder" and on its short name, for instance write "footer" as well;

      5. From the ezpublish root, run the following command again:

      php ezpublish/console test:testSearch footer
      

      You still get only the default footer:

      Found: footer
      Execution terminated.
      

      even if "footer" is contained in a field of "folder";

      6. Run the following command:

      php ezpublish/console test:testSearch folder
      

      You'll get empty results:

      Execution terminated.
      

      doesn't find either by its name.

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Paulo Nunes added a comment -

          Andrzej Longosz: can you please update "Fix Version/s" tag?
          Thank you.

          Show
          Paulo Nunes added a comment - Andrzej Longosz : can you please update "Fix Version/s" tag? Thank you.
          Hide
          Rui Silva added a comment -

          Andrzej Longosz, what exactly is the testing scope of these fixes, and which of the six of them exactly are necessary to test the legacy indexing issue?
          QA is having difficulty understanding what exactly is necessary to test this and if and why fixes for Solr are needed for a fix on Legacy search engine.
          Thanks.

          Show
          Rui Silva added a comment - Andrzej Longosz , what exactly is the testing scope of these fixes, and which of the six of them exactly are necessary to test the legacy indexing issue? QA is having difficulty understanding what exactly is necessary to test this and if and why fixes for Solr are needed for a fix on Legacy search engine. Thanks.
          Hide
          Rui Silva added a comment -

          Tested and approved by QA for master.

          Show
          Rui Silva added a comment - Tested and approved by QA for master.
          Hide
          Andrzej Longosz added a comment -

          Paulo Nunes: done

          Rui Silva: To test this you need to have eZ Platform web app with ezpublish-kernel taken from master branch (every Kernel PR is needed for this to work). eZ Platform needs to be configured for legacy search engine (for simple setup it can be set in app/config/parameters.yml). Attached test case and steps to reproduce should be enough to test this. After adding some content object (e.g. a Folder named "folder") attached test command should display it as found.

          Fixes for Solr are needed only if Solr bundle is enabled in app/AppKernel.php along with Legacy Search Bundle. Moreover most of these fixes are due to performance issues not the actual fix of a bug (as I understand it at least ).

          This is my first bug fix that covers so extensive changes, so I'm not sure if my explanation makes sense for QA. Maybe André Rømcke could comment on this?

          Show
          Andrzej Longosz added a comment - Paulo Nunes : done Rui Silva : To test this you need to have eZ Platform web app with ezpublish-kernel taken from master branch (every Kernel PR is needed for this to work). eZ Platform needs to be configured for legacy search engine (for simple setup it can be set in app/config/parameters.yml ). Attached test case and steps to reproduce should be enough to test this. After adding some content object (e.g. a Folder named "folder") attached test command should display it as found. Fixes for Solr are needed only if Solr bundle is enabled in app/AppKernel.php along with Legacy Search Bundle. Moreover most of these fixes are due to performance issues not the actual fix of a bug (as I understand it at least ). This is my first bug fix that covers so extensive changes, so I'm not sure if my explanation makes sense for QA. Maybe André Rømcke could comment on this?
          Hide
          Rui Silva added a comment -

          Thanks Andrzej Longosz, as you can see, QA was afterwards able to certify this. We'd had just a little trouble understanding what this was meant to fix, exactly, because we were having consistency issues reproducing the issue I opened, and then run the test case again with the fix to see if it was fixed: we were not seeing it as fixed though, but then QA realized it must be due to the not-yet-implemented second jira of the epic that envelops this, since I was taking advantage of the previously existent contents created on the first run.
          I reinstalled it and did it all from scratch the second time, and it went ok.
          However, any further explanation or detailed information on this, or on how it is supposed to work as a whole, is welcome, since as for now, only this first part was tested and QA'ed, and it may be useful for later developments following this.

          Show
          Rui Silva added a comment - Thanks Andrzej Longosz , as you can see, QA was afterwards able to certify this. We'd had just a little trouble understanding what this was meant to fix, exactly, because we were having consistency issues reproducing the issue I opened, and then run the test case again with the fix to see if it was fixed: we were not seeing it as fixed though, but then QA realized it must be due to the not-yet-implemented second jira of the epic that envelops this, since I was taking advantage of the previously existent contents created on the first run. I reinstalled it and did it all from scratch the second time, and it went ok. However, any further explanation or detailed information on this, or on how it is supposed to work as a whole, is welcome, since as for now, only this first part was tested and QA'ed, and it may be useful for later developments following this.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Unassigned
              Reporter:
              Rui Silva
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              7 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                Time Tracking

                Estimated:
                Original Estimate - 0 minutes
                0m
                Remaining:
                Remaining Estimate - 0 minutes
                0m
                Logged:
                Time Spent - 5 weeks, 2 days, 2 hours, 15 minutes
                5w 2d 2h 15m