Add support for custom date formats and OpenSearch date formats for date fields as part of Lucene query #2762

manasvinibs · 2024-06-18T22:46:47Z

Description

This change adds support for OpenSearch Date formats and custom date formats to be part of SQL Lucene queries.
Without this change, we are supporting only list of selected formats which always gets formatted to ISO local string or epoch before submitting to opensearch dsl query.

Refactors ExprType to be OpenSearchDateType object instead of ExprCoretype enums passed as a param to the Lucene QueryBuilder.
Extract OpenSearchDateNamedFormatters and OpenSearchDateCustomFormatters from the OpenSearchDateType object which is set during IndexMapping field parsing for a field type.
Format information is passed to the ExprValue implementation constructor to parse the date string using the field specific formatters.
Adds unit tests for all the different formats use cases.
Adds OpenSearch package dependency to the core module to use OpenSearch provided DateFormatter and DateFormatters classes instead of java provided DateFormatter.

Follow-up PR - I'll add IT tests in a separate PR

Issues Resolved

#2700

Check List

New functionality includes testing.
- All tests pass, including unit test, integration test and doctest
New functionality has been documented.
- New functionality has javadoc added
- New functionality has user manual doc added
Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

penghuo · 2024-06-20T16:03:30Z

core/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/data/model/ExprDateValue.java


  /** Constructor of ExprDateValue. */
  public ExprDateValue(String date) {
    try {
      this.date = LocalDate.parse(date, DATE_TIME_FORMATTER_VARIABLE_NANOS_OPTIONAL);
+      this.datePattern = determineDatePattern(date);


does parese execute 2 times, the reasons is LocalDate.parse already parse the date string

On line #44 here, yes we are already parsing the date string to Local date object. But I need to know the exact pattern that matched the input date string. So inside determineDatePattern function, using parse function (LocalDate/LocalDatetime) I'm determining the matching pattern and returning that to set this.datePattern. This date pattern is used to format the LocalDate date object instead of default ISO_LOCAL_DATE string inside value().

core/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/data/model/ExprDateValue.java

core/src/test/java/org/opensearch/sql/data/model/DateTimeValueTest.java

core/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/data/model/ExprDateValue.java

ykmr1224

Seems you need to reformat the code using ./gradlew spotlessApply.

core/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/utils/DateTimeFormatters.java

...ch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/storage/script/filter/lucene/LuceneQuery.java

...rch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/storage/script/filter/lucene/RangeQuery.java

penghuo · 2024-07-18T00:46:38Z

opensearch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/data/type/OpenSearchDateType.java

+    List<DateFormatter> dateFormatters = this.getAllNamedFormatters();
+    dateFormatters.addAll(this.getAllCustomFormatters());
+    ZonedDateTime zonedDateTime = null;
+
+    // check if dateFormatters are empty, then set default ones
+    if (dateFormatters.isEmpty()) {
+      dateFormatters = initializeDateFormatters();
+    }


List<DateFormatter> dateFormatters = this.getAllNamedFormatters(); dateFormatters.addAll(this.getAllCustomFormatters());

this code will duplicate getAllCustomFormatters?

use Stream.concat to concat two list works?

formats is fetched from OpenSearch index mapping, if formats is null, does it means the OpenSearchDataType is a wrapper of CoreType. So in this case, should we use OPENSEARCH_DEFAULT_FORMATS to format to parse the data?

When format is null, it can still be OpenSearchDateType field as there can be date fields without formats (default ones) defined. So I have used OPENSEARCH_DEFAULT_FORMATS to format the date object in those cases.

opensearch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/data/type/OpenSearchDateType.java

opensearch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/data/type/OpenSearchDataType.java

opensearch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/data/type/OpenSearchDateType.java

opensearch/src/test/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/data/type/OpenSearchDateTypeTest.java

...ch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/storage/script/filter/lucene/LuceneQuery.java

…e fields as part of Lucene query Github Issue - opensearch-project#2700 Signed-off-by: Manasvini B S <manasvis@amazon.com>

penghuo · 2024-07-18T21:41:24Z

docs/user/general/datatypes.rst

@@ -400,6 +400,48 @@ Querying such index will provide a response with ``schema`` block as shown below
        "status": 200
    }

+If the sql query contains an `IndexDateField` and a literal value with an operator (such as a term query or a range query), then the literal value can be in the `IndexDateField` format.


term query and range query is OpenSearch concept, there is not function / operator in SQL is term/range.

penghuo · 2024-07-18T22:05:39Z

opensearch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/data/type/OpenSearchDataType.java

@@ -230,6 +234,9 @@ public String legacyTypeName() {
    if (mappingType == null) {
      return exprCoreType.typeName();
    }
+    if (mappingType.toString().equalsIgnoreCase("DATE")) {


change to mappingType == Date?

Should we check mappingType == DateNanos either?

if (mappingType == Date || mappingType == DateNanos) {

penghuo · 2024-07-18T22:22:32Z

opensearch/src/test/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/data/type/OpenSearchDataTypeTest.java

@@ -104,8 +104,8 @@ private static Stream<Arguments> getTestDataWithType() {
        Arguments.of(MappingType.ScaledFloat, "scaled_float", DOUBLE),
        Arguments.of(MappingType.Double, "double", DOUBLE),
        Arguments.of(MappingType.Boolean, "boolean", BOOLEAN),
-        Arguments.of(MappingType.Date, "date", TIMESTAMP),
-        Arguments.of(MappingType.DateNanos, "date", TIMESTAMP),
+        Arguments.of(MappingType.Date, "timestamp", TIMESTAMP),


Please double confirm on UT chagne. does all these date -> timestamp change necessary?

All these assertions directly comparing with legacyTypeName and hence need this update. I think these changes are necessary and only in UT to avoid any breaking changes with type change from ExprCoreType to OpenSearchDateType inside fieldMappings map.

I only find the legacy name change for Date in production code, why the DateNanos changed in test either? https://github.com/opensearch-project/sql/pull/2762/files/ea3e205184dda4e8e0d5ba55cd9cf18eac82c30e#r1683753172

I think this is because when we create OpenSearchDataType instance for every field mapping type, we are creating OpenSearchDateType instance for both Mappingtype.Date and MappingType.DateNanos- https://github.com/opensearch-project/sql/blob/main/opensearch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/data/type/OpenSearchDataType.java#L165
and set the mapping type to Date even for DateNanos (not sure why is it this way) - https://github.com/opensearch-project/sql/blob/main/opensearch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/data/type/OpenSearchDateType.java#L143
So I think here UT assertion still looking for Mapping type date even for date nanos I believe.

penghuo

Please double confirm on the UT assert change,

LantaoJin · 2024-07-19T04:04:25Z

https://github.com/opensearch-project/sql/pull/2762/files/ea3e205184dda4e8e0d5ba55cd9cf18eac82c30e#r1683753172

opensearch-trigger-bot · 2024-07-19T17:40:31Z

The backport to 2.x failed:

The process '/usr/bin/git' failed with exit code 128

To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal:

# Navigate to the root of your repository
cd $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
# Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add ../.worktrees/sql/backport-2.x 2.x
# Navigate to the new working tree
pushd ../.worktrees/sql/backport-2.x
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport/backport-2762-to-2.x
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 0fad56db4b3e8983e2e7fafcf9fb80e592d97ddb
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport/backport-2762-to-2.x
# Go back to the original working tree
popd
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove ../.worktrees/sql/backport-2.x

Then, create a pull request where the base branch is 2.x and the compare/head branch is backport/backport-2762-to-2.x.

…e fields as part of Lucene query (opensearch-project#2762) Github Issue - opensearch-project#2700 Signed-off-by: Manasvini B S <manasvis@amazon.com> (cherry picked from commit 0fad56d)

…e fields as part of Lucene query (opensearch-project#2762) Github Issue - opensearch-project#2700 Signed-off-by: Manasvini B S <manasvis@amazon.com> (cherry picked from commit 0fad56d) Signed-off-by: Manasvini B S <manasvis@amazon.com>

…e fields as part of Lucene query (#2762) (#2849) Github Issue - #2700 (cherry picked from commit 0fad56d) Signed-off-by: Manasvini B S <manasvis@amazon.com>

…e fields as part of Lucene query (#2762) (#2849) Github Issue - #2700 (cherry picked from commit 0fad56d) Signed-off-by: Manasvini B S <manasvis@amazon.com> (cherry picked from commit 02d57e0) Signed-off-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

…e fields as part of Lucene query (#2762) (#2849) (#2851) Github Issue - #2700 (cherry picked from commit 0fad56d) (cherry picked from commit 02d57e0) Signed-off-by: Manasvini B S <manasvis@amazon.com> Signed-off-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

…e fields as part of Lucene query (opensearch-project#2762) Github Issue - opensearch-project#2700 Signed-off-by: Manasvini B S <manasvis@amazon.com>

manasvinibs requested review from ps48, kavithacm, derek-ho, joshuali925, dai-chen, YANG-DB, rupal-bq, mengweieric, vamsi-amazon, Swiddis, penghuo, seankao-az, MaxKsyunz, Yury-Fridlyand, anirudha, forestmvey, acarbonetto, GumpacG and ykmr1224 as code owners June 18, 2024 22:46

manasvinibs added the v2.16.0 Issues targeting release v2.16.0 label Jun 18, 2024

penghuo reviewed Jun 20, 2024

View reviewed changes

ykmr1224 reviewed Jun 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

core/src/test/java/org/opensearch/sql/data/model/DateTimeValueTest.java Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

core/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/data/model/ExprDateValue.java Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

manasvinibs force-pushed the Issue-2700 branch from 27a6c10 to a5526e5 Compare June 23, 2024 22:07

manasvinibs requested review from penghuo and ykmr1224 June 24, 2024 19:09

ykmr1224 reviewed Jun 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

core/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/utils/DateTimeFormatters.java Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

manasvinibs force-pushed the Issue-2700 branch 2 times, most recently from a2c9f68 to c49231d Compare July 8, 2024 06:07

manasvinibs changed the title ~~Fix to support different date formats in the sql query without date casting~~ Add support for custom date format and openSearch date format for date fields as part of Lucene query Jul 8, 2024

manasvinibs changed the title ~~Add support for custom date format and openSearch date format for date fields as part of Lucene query~~ Add support for custom date formats and OpenSearch date formats for date fields as part of Lucene query Jul 8, 2024

manasvinibs force-pushed the Issue-2700 branch 2 times, most recently from 003647b to af13fe5 Compare July 17, 2024 16:39

manasvinibs requested review from penghuo and ykmr1224 July 17, 2024 17:26

penghuo reviewed Jul 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

manasvinibs force-pushed the Issue-2700 branch from be2351d to 4a3709e Compare July 18, 2024 06:33

LantaoJin reviewed Jul 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

...ch/src/main/java/org/opensearch/sql/opensearch/storage/script/filter/lucene/LuceneQuery.java Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Add support for custom date format and openSearch date format for dat…

ea3e205

…e fields as part of Lucene query Github Issue - opensearch-project#2700 Signed-off-by: Manasvini B S <manasvis@amazon.com>

manasvinibs force-pushed the Issue-2700 branch from 4a3709e to ea3e205 Compare July 18, 2024 20:27

penghuo reviewed Jul 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

penghuo approved these changes Jul 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

ykmr1224 approved these changes Jul 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

LantaoJin approved these changes Jul 19, 2024

View reviewed changes

penghuo added the backport 2.x label Jul 19, 2024

penghuo merged commit 0fad56d into opensearch-project:main Jul 19, 2024
14 of 15 checks passed

opensearch-trigger-bot bot added the backport-failed label Jul 19, 2024

manasvinibs mentioned this pull request Jul 22, 2024

[Backport 2.x] Add support for custom date formats and OpenSearch date formats for date fields as part of Lucene query #2849

Merged

6 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add support for custom date formats and OpenSearch date formats for date fields as part of Lucene query #2762

Add support for custom date formats and OpenSearch date formats for date fields as part of Lucene query #2762

manasvinibs commented Jun 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading

penghuo Jun 20, 2024

manasvinibs Jun 24, 2024

ykmr1224 left a comment

penghuo Jul 18, 2024

penghuo Jul 18, 2024

manasvinibs Jul 18, 2024

penghuo Jul 18, 2024

penghuo Jul 18, 2024

LantaoJin Jul 19, 2024

penghuo Jul 18, 2024

manasvinibs Jul 18, 2024

LantaoJin Jul 19, 2024 •

edited

Loading

manasvinibs Jul 19, 2024

penghuo left a comment

LantaoJin commented Jul 19, 2024

opensearch-trigger-bot bot commented Jul 19, 2024

Add support for custom date formats and OpenSearch date formats for date fields as part of Lucene query #2762

Add support for custom date formats and OpenSearch date formats for date fields as part of Lucene query #2762

Conversation

manasvinibs commented Jun 18, 2024 • edited Loading

Description

Issues Resolved

Check List

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ykmr1224 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

LantaoJin Jul 19, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

penghuo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

LantaoJin commented Jul 19, 2024

opensearch-trigger-bot bot commented Jul 19, 2024

manasvinibs commented Jun 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading

LantaoJin Jul 19, 2024 •

edited

Loading