Skip to content

OAK-12101 - Skip indexing of very long tags (#2768)#2769

Merged
thomasmueller merged 1 commit intotrunkfrom
OAK-12101
Mar 6, 2026
Merged

OAK-12101 - Skip indexing of very long tags (#2768)#2769
thomasmueller merged 1 commit intotrunkfrom
OAK-12101

Conversation

@thomasmueller
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

  • feat: skip long similarity tags

  • feat: add tests

  • feat: log warning once per minute

  • feat: skip long similarity tags for dynamic boosting

  • fix: similarity tag constant naming

  • feat: add option to disable filtering

  • refactor: standardise naming with existing conventions

  • feat: silence logs per property

  • fix: comment

  • feat: add dynamic boost test

  • doc: add details to lucene.md

  • fix: test name


* feat: skip long similarity tags

* feat: add tests

* feat: log warning once per minute

* feat: skip long similarity tags for dynamic boosting

* fix: similarity tag constant naming

* feat: add option to disable filtering

* refactor: standardise naming with existing conventions

* feat: silence logs per property

* fix: comment

* feat: add dynamic boost test

* doc: add details to lucene.md

* fix: test name

---------

Co-authored-by: Anton Hosgood <ahosgood@adobe.com>
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Quality Gate Failed Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
18.8% Coverage on New Code (required ≥ 80%)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

@antonhosgood
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The new logic added to oak-search in this PR is tested within tests found in oak-lucene which probably explains the 0 coverage on new code in the Sonar report. Otherwise, the logic is covered by the newly added tests.

@thomasmueller
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

The quality gate failed because the tests are in a different module that the code is.
(This is due to the modular nature of Oak).
I'll merge it anyway, because I don't want to fix Sonar or make Oak less modular today.

@thomasmueller thomasmueller merged commit 1f2bbd0 into trunk Mar 6, 2026
2 of 3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants