ID / Name label option for Filterbox

[durchgedreht]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
In many DBs there's an ID / Name pattern. So the id is integer and name is String for human readable representation.
When using Filterbox you have to decide to use id field or String field, but ideally you'd like to use the id field for the technical filter and use the name for labelling only.

example table:

id	name	revenue
1	sports	1000
2	cars	3000
3	entertainment	20000

Benefits would be:

• User still sees a list of Strings to include (as if he selected name)
• preselecxt_fiter option could inject INTEGER values from the outside. This is especially useful from an integration perspective as normally APIs and applications that link directly into superset and want to preselect a filter will work on the ID rather than on the name
• imagine the name is changed -this would break the 'contract' between the url parameters and the DB values. The argument, it's based on the data is very weak as names are considered dimension data and thus any data tool should rely on the ID field.

Describe the solution you'd like
It would be great to have an option 'verbose column' (or similar) in the filterbox's parameters. That column selection is optional, but would take care about the ID -> string mapping.

In the UI filter box a user would just see values like 'sports', 'cars', 'entertainment', but it could be controlled by preselect_filter using IDs 1, 2, 3.

Describe alternatives you've considered
If the 'verbose' field could be entered using a dedicated SQL expression potentially controlled/secured by some JINJA templating, that would maby more technical, but also more flexible.

[junlincc]

@durchgedreht thanks for suggesting. we included this item in 2021Q1 roadmap(tentative), but will mostly likely to implement the enhancement on the dashboard native filter, which is currently behind a feature flag.

[regisb]

Hi! I enabled dashboard native filters on my instance but did not see this feature. I also could not find a report about this feature in the related PRs:
#12148
#13591

Can someone please confirm that this feature is still on the roadmap? If yes, what's the corresponding ticket?

[jhult]

@junlincc and @suddjian,

Any news on this?

[danielsmeyer]

Is there a branch that I could checkout to get started on helping push this forward? @jhult @junlincc @suddjian
I have some time to get this integrated into the native filter.

[Eragra3]

Hello, this seems like a relatively simple feature, but would make a lot of stuff easier.

Is this item still on the roadmap?

[junlincc]

Will pick it up, thanks for letting us know!

[amitmiran137]

This got enabled in native filters and will not be addressed under filter box which is depracated already

[mathieudruart]

@amitmiran137 Hello, do you know which version of superset enable this in native filters ? Thank you !

[amitmiran137]

Probably 1.3.2

[mathieudruart]

@amitmiran137 I'm using superset 1.3.2 but I can't figure how to do it, maybe I'm missing something ?

[nytai]

Reopening this issue as I does not appear to be solved. If I am mistaken could you please link a screenshot or PR so users are aware of how the feature works?

cc @amitmiran137 @junlincc

[rusackas]

From what I can tell, this was not built as part of the original Native Filters scope. We might be able to shoehorn it into some upcoming work around Native Filters, as it seems to me like a perfectly reasonable and useful feature addition. That said, it's more of a feature request than a bug report, per se, so I'm tempted to move this to the "Ideas" area of Discussions instead of its current state as an issue. Any objections to the move?

[villebro]

I can confirm this is not yet available. In a sense adding this feature isn't very difficult: The Select component already supports having different labels and values, and adding it to the filter component is relatively trivial. However, I'm more concerned with the following aspects of this feature:

1. The native filter control panel has already grown way out of proportion, and we'd need to generalize it some more so that it would be more similar to the Explore control panel. I didn't yet check, but I fear adding this dropdown to the Value filter would require yet another if/then/else to the filter config modal.
2. If the user chooses a combination of value and label columns that aren't 1-1 mapped, the user may get very strange behavior. To avoid confusing error states, we would probably need to verify that all value/label pairs are strictly 1-1.

I'm most concerned with 1), but as I haven't worked on this area for a while I'm not sure if this is a valid concern. @michael-s-molina , do you know if we could easily add an optional column label selector to the Value filter without adding more tech debt to the filter config modal?

[michael-s-molina]

@villebro We are currently working on stage 1 of the native filters design changes. The primary objective is to remove the old filter box at the end of this stage. I would advise including this requirement in stage 2 analysis where we'll probably refactor the whole module and your concerns will be addressed.

[villebro]

Thanks @michael-s-molina , that sounds like a good plan!