3571: Introduce two filters to select documents with `null` and empty fields r=irevoire a=Kerollmops
# Pull Request
## Related issue
This PR implements the `X IS NULL`, `X IS NOT NULL`, `X IS EMPTY`, `X IS NOT EMPTY` filters that [this comment](https://github.com/meilisearch/product/discussions/539#discussioncomment-5115884) is describing in a very detailed manner.
## What does this PR do?
### `IS NULL` and `IS NOT NULL`
This PR will be exposed as a prototype for now. Below is the copy/pasted version of a spec that defines this filter.
- `IS NULL` matches fields that `EXISTS` AND `= IS NULL`
- `IS NOT NULL` matches fields that `NOT EXISTS` OR `!= IS NULL`
1. `{"name": "A", "price": null}`
2. `{"name": "A", "price": 10}`
3. `{"name": "A"}`
`price IS NULL` would match 1
`price IS NOT NULL` or `NOT price IS NULL` would match 2,3
`price EXISTS` would match 1, 2
`price NOT EXISTS` or `NOT price EXISTS` would match 3
common query : `(price EXISTS) AND (price IS NOT NULL)` would match 2
### `IS EMPTY` and `IS NOT EMPTY`
- `IS EMPTY` matches Array `[]`, Object `{}`, or String `""` fields that `EXISTS` and are empty
- `IS NOT EMPTY` matches fields that `NOT EXISTS` OR are not empty.
1. `{"name": "A", "tags": null}`
2. `{"name": "A", "tags": [null]}`
3. `{"name": "A", "tags": []}`
4. `{"name": "A", "tags": ["hello","world"]}`
5. `{"name": "A", "tags": [""]}`
6. `{"name": "A"}`
7. `{"name": "A", "tags": {}}`
8. `{"name": "A", "tags": {"t1":"v1"}}`
9. `{"name": "A", "tags": {"t1":""}}`
10. `{"name": "A", "tags": ""}`
`tags IS EMPTY` would match 3,7,10
`tags IS NOT EMPTY` or `NOT tags IS EMPTY` would match 1,2,4,5,6,8,9
`tags IS NULL` would match 1
`tags IS NOT NULL` or `NOT tags IS NULL` would match 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10
`tags EXISTS` would match 1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,10
`tags NOT EXISTS` or `NOT tags EXISTS` would match 6
common query : `(tags EXISTS) AND (tags IS NOT NULL) AND (tags IS NOT EMPTY)` would match 2,4,5,8,9
## What should the reviewer do?
- Check that I tested the filters
- Check that I deleted the ids of the documents when deleting documents
Co-authored-by: Clément Renault <clement@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: Kerollmops <clement@meilisearch.com>
3641: Bring back changes from `release v1.1.0` into `main` after v1.1.0 release r=curquiza a=curquiza
Replace https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/pull/3637 since we don't want to pull commits from `main` into `release-v1.1.0` when fixing git conflicts
Co-authored-by: ManyTheFish <many@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: bors[bot] <26634292+bors[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Charlotte Vermandel <charlottevermandel@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Tamo <tamo@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: Louis Dureuil <louis@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: curquiza <clementine@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: Clément Renault <clement@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: Many the fish <many@meilisearch.com>
Previously, if the primary key was set and a Settings update contained
a primary key, an error would be returned.
However, this error is not needed if the new PK == the current PK.
This commit just checks to see if the PK actually changes
before raising an error.
3568: CI: Fix `publish-aarch64` job that still uses ubuntu-18.04 r=Kerollmops a=curquiza
Fixes#3563
Main change
- add the usage of the `ubuntu-18.04` container instead of the native `ubuntu-18.04` of GitHub actions: I had to install docker in the container.
Small additional changes
- remove useless `fail-fast` and unused/irrelevant matrix inputs (`build`, `linker`, `os`, `use-cross`...)
- Remove useless step in job
Proof of work with this CI triggered on this current branch: https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/actions/runs/4366233882
3569: Enhance Japanese language detection r=dureuill a=ManyTheFish
# Pull Request
This PR is a prototype and can be tested by downloading [the dedicated docker image](https://hub.docker.com/layers/getmeili/meilisearch/prototype-better-language-detection-0/images/sha256-a12847de00e21a71ab797879fd09777dadcb0881f65b5f810e7d1ed434d116ef?context=explore):
```bash
$ docker pull getmeili/meilisearch:prototype-better-language-detection-0
```
## Context
Some Languages are harder to detect than others, this miss-detection leads to bad tokenization making some words or even documents completely unsearchable. Japanese is the main Language affected and can be detected as Chinese which has a completely different way of tokenization.
A [first iteration has been implemented for v1.1.0](https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/pull/3347) but is an insufficient enhancement to make Japanese work. This first implementation was detecting the Language during the indexing to avoid bad detections during the search.
Unfortunately, some documents (shorter ones) can be wrongly detected as Chinese running bad tokenization for these documents and making possible the detection of Chinese during the search because it has been detected during the indexing.
For instance, a Japanese document `{"id": 1, "name": "東京スカパラダイスオーケストラ"}` is detected as Japanese during indexing, during the search the query `東京` will be detected as Japanese because only Japanese documents have been detected during indexing despite the fact that v1.0.2 would detect it as Chinese.
However if in the dataset there is at least one document containing a field with only Kanjis like:
_A document with only 1 field containing only Kanjis:_
```json
{
"id":4,
"name": "東京特許許可局"
}
```
_A document with 1 field containing only Kanjis and 1 field containing several Japanese characters:_
```json
{
"id":105,
"name": "東京特許許可局",
"desc": "日経平均株価は26日 に約8カ月ぶりに2万4000円の心理的な節目を上回った。株高を支える材料のひとつは、自民党総裁選で3選を決めた安倍晋三首相の経済政策への期待だ。恩恵が見込まれるとされる人材サービスや建設株の一角が買われている。ただ思惑が先行して資金が集まっている面 は否めない。実際に政策効果を取り込む企業はどこか、なお未知数だ。"
}
```
Then, in both cases, the field `name` will be detected as Chinese during indexing allowing the search to detect Chinese in queries. Therefore, the query `東京` will be detected as Chinese and only the two last documents will be retrieved by Meilisearch.
## Technical Approach
The current PR partially fixes these issues by:
1) Adding a check over potential miss-detections and rerunning the extraction of the document forcing the tokenization over the main Languages detected in it.
> 1) run a first extraction allowing the tokenizer to detect any Language in any Script
> 2) generate a distribution of tokens by Script and Languages (`script_language`)
> 3) if for a Script we have a token distribution of one of the Language that is under the threshold, then we rerun the extraction forbidding the tokenizer to detect the marginal Languages
> 4) the tokenizer will fall back on the other available Languages to tokenize the text. For example, if the Chinese were marginally detected compared to the Japanese on the CJ script, then the second extraction will force Japanese tokenization for CJ text in the document. however, the text on another script like Latin will not be impacted by this restriction.
2) Adding a filtering threshold during the search over Languages that have been marginally detected in documents
## Limits
This PR introduces 2 arbitrary thresholds:
1) during the indexing, a Language is considered miss-detected if the number of detected tokens of this Language is under 10% of the tokens detected in the same Script (Japanese and Chinese are 2 different Languages sharing the "same" script "CJK").
2) during the search, a Language is considered marginal if less than 5% of documents are detected as this Language.
This PR only partially fixes these issues:
- ✅ the query `東京` now find Japanese documents if less than 5% of documents are detected as Chinese.
- ✅ the document with the id `105` containing the Japanese field `desc` but the miss-detected field `name` is now completely detected and tokenized as Japanese and is found with the query `東京`.
- ❌ the document with the id `4` no longer breaks the search Language detection but continues to be detected as a Chinese document and can't be found during the search.
## Related issue
Fixes#3565
## Possible future enhancements
- Change or contribute to the Library used to detect the Language
- the related issue on Whatlang: https://github.com/greyblake/whatlang-rs/issues/122
Co-authored-by: curquiza <clementine@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: ManyTheFish <many@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: Many the fish <many@meilisearch.com>
3525: Fix phrase search containing stop words r=ManyTheFish a=ManyTheFish
# Summary
A search with a phrase containing only stop words was returning an HTTP error 500,
this PR filters the phrase containing only stop words dropping them before the search starts, a query with a phrase containing only stop words now behaves like a placeholder search.
fixes https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/issues/3521
related v1.0.2 PR on milli: https://github.com/meilisearch/milli/pull/779
Co-authored-by: ManyTheFish <many@meilisearch.com>
3319: Transparently resize indexes on MaxDatabaseSizeReached errors r=Kerollmops a=dureuill
# Pull Request
## Related issue
Related to https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/discussions/3280, depends on https://github.com/meilisearch/milli/pull/760
## What does this PR do?
### User standpoint
- Meilisearch no longer fails tasks that encounter the `milli::UserError(MaxDatabaseSizeReached)` error.
- Instead, these tasks are retried after increasing the maximum size allocated to the index where the failure occurred.
### Implementation standpoint
- Add `Batch::index_uid` to get the `index_uid` of a batch of task if there is one
- `IndexMapper::create_or_open_index` now takes an additional `size` argument that allows to (re)open indexes with a size different from the base `IndexScheduler::index_size` field
- `IndexScheduler::tick` now returns a `Result<TickOutcome>` instead of a `Result<usize>`. This offers more explicit control over what the behavior should be wrt the next tick.
- Add `IndexStatus::BeingResized` that contains a handle that a thread can use to await for the resize operation to complete and the index to be available again.
- Add `IndexMapper::resize_index` to increase the size of an index.
- In `IndexScheduler::tick`, intercept task batches that failed due to `MaxDatabaseSizeReached` and resize the index that caused the error, then request a new tick that will eventually handle the still enqueued task.
## Testing the PR
The following diff can be applied to this branch to make testing the PR easier:
<details>
```diff
diff --git a/index-scheduler/src/index_mapper.rs b/index-scheduler/src/index_mapper.rs
index 553ab45a..022b2f00 100644
--- a/index-scheduler/src/index_mapper.rs
+++ b/index-scheduler/src/index_mapper.rs
`@@` -228,13 +228,15 `@@` impl IndexMapper {
drop(lock);
+ std:🧵:sleep_ms(2000);
+
let current_size = index.map_size()?;
let closing_event = index.prepare_for_closing();
- log::info!("Resizing index {} from {} to {} bytes", name, current_size, current_size * 2);
+ log::error!("Resizing index {} from {} to {} bytes", name, current_size, current_size * 2);
closing_event.wait();
- log::info!("Resized index {} from {} to {} bytes", name, current_size, current_size * 2);
+ log::error!("Resized index {} from {} to {} bytes", name, current_size, current_size * 2);
let index_path = self.base_path.join(uuid.to_string());
let index = self.create_or_open_index(&index_path, None, 2 * current_size)?;
`@@` -268,8 +270,10 `@@` impl IndexMapper {
match index {
Some(Available(index)) => break index,
Some(BeingResized(ref resize_operation)) => {
+ log::error!("waiting for resize end");
// Deadlock: no lock taken while doing this operation.
resize_operation.wait();
+ log::error!("trying our luck again!");
continue;
}
Some(BeingDeleted) => return Err(Error::IndexNotFound(name.to_string())),
diff --git a/index-scheduler/src/lib.rs b/index-scheduler/src/lib.rs
index 11b17d05..242dc095 100644
--- a/index-scheduler/src/lib.rs
+++ b/index-scheduler/src/lib.rs
`@@` -908,6 +908,7 `@@` impl IndexScheduler {
///
/// Returns the number of processed tasks.
fn tick(&self) -> Result<TickOutcome> {
+ log::error!("ticking!");
#[cfg(test)]
{
*self.run_loop_iteration.write().unwrap() += 1;
diff --git a/meilisearch/src/main.rs b/meilisearch/src/main.rs
index 050c825a..63f312f6 100644
--- a/meilisearch/src/main.rs
+++ b/meilisearch/src/main.rs
`@@` -25,7 +25,7 `@@` fn setup(opt: &Opt) -> anyhow::Result<()> {
#[actix_web::main]
async fn main() -> anyhow::Result<()> {
- let (opt, config_read_from) = Opt::try_build()?;
+ let (mut opt, config_read_from) = Opt::try_build()?;
setup(&opt)?;
`@@` -56,6 +56,8 `@@` We generated a secure master key for you (you can safely copy this token):
_ => (),
}
+ opt.max_index_size = byte_unit::Byte::from_str("1MB").unwrap();
+
let (index_scheduler, auth_controller) = setup_meilisearch(&opt)?;
#[cfg(all(not(debug_assertions), feature = "analytics"))]
```
</details>
Mainly, these debug changes do the following:
- Set the default index size to 1MiB so that index resizes are initially frequent
- Turn some logs from info to error so that they can be displayed with `--log-level ERROR` (hiding the other infos)
- Add a long sleep between the beginning and the end of the resize so that we can observe the `BeingResized` index status (otherwise it would never come up in my tests)
## Open questions
- Is the growth factor of x2 the correct solution? For a `Vec` in memory it makes sense, but here we're manipulating quantities that are potentially in the order of 500GiBs. For bigger indexes it may make more sense to add at most e.g. 100GiB on each resize operation, avoiding big steps like 500GiB -> 1TiB.
## PR checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
- [ ] Does this PR fix an existing issue, or have you listed the changes applied in the PR description (and why they are needed)?
- [ ] Have you read the contributing guidelines?
- [ ] Have you made sure that the title is accurate and descriptive of the changes?
Thank you so much for contributing to Meilisearch!
3470: Autobatch addition and deletion r=irevoire a=irevoire
This PR adds the capability to meilisearch to batch document addition and deletion together.
Fix https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/issues/3440
--------------
Things to check before merging;
- [x] What happens if we delete multiple time the same documents -> add a test
- [x] If a documentDeletion gets batched with a documentAddition but the index doesn't exist yet? It should not work
Co-authored-by: Louis Dureuil <louis@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: Tamo <tamo@meilisearch.com>
