- Issue created by @bcizej
- @bcizej opened merge request.
- Status changed to Needs work
about 1 year ago 9:48pm 6 September 2023 - 🇸🇮Slovenia bcizej
Updated the
UpdateHook9002Test.php
test that reproduces the issue. - last update
about 1 year ago 82 pass, 15 fail - last update
about 1 year ago 108 pass, 1 fail - last update
about 1 year ago 108 pass, 1 fail - 🇦🇹Austria tgoeg
I have a feeling we need to drop and recreate the index when upgrading from 1.0.0 to dev-1.0.x anyway. Not 100% sure about it, but that's what I did whenever I got strange results (as e.g. in 🐛 No results from file_extractor extracted data in Drupal 10.1 Closed: works as designed and some other scenarios not documented in the issue queue) and it mostly magically solved it. I could be wrong and the fixed issue 📌 Remove entity id mapping config Fixed (and my multi-version setup) was also to blame and things work out with the current codebase.
It might even be easier for end users to automatically have them being recreated, as otherwise they would need to migrate the data over when switching Meilisearch versions (<1.0 to >1.0, if that even works?) but I have to look into this sometime. This module basically does everything now that's needed in Meilisearch anyway (no need to manually set off HTTP requests for sorts and filterable attributes, etc. anymore, yay!)
The only thing remaining (and I think that's only me at the moment) is the dropped privilege API key setup I'd want to move over to a new Meilisearch server. Other than that, unconditionally recreating everything might be the safest approach that should guarantee a smooth upgrade.I'd consider 1.0.0 to only be something for the daring, so anyone really using it in production (is this anyone else but me?) should be OK to have a more elaborate update to what I'd probably call 2.0.0, if this eases future development and user friendliness. The above restrictions sound like too much of a hassle only for making the upgrade process easier for the few people that might use it in production already.
Deleting the index and re-importing the config with drush is a matter of 2 minutes. I had upgrade paths that were a lot harder than this!Don't want to prevent you from making this bullet-proof, as this is certainly also legit from a quality PoV, but don't just do this because you know I (or a few others, but I can only speak for myself) have a production setup.
(I am definitely grateful for the quality-oriented approach of all of you, not only in this regard. I don't want to water that down and I'd like to say a big thank you for this right here!)
- 🇸🇮Slovenia bcizej
I have a feeling we need to drop and recreate the index when upgrading from 1.0.0 to dev-1.0.x anyway. Not 100% sure about it, but that's what I did whenever I got strange results (as e.g. in #3385410: No results from file_extractor extracted data in Drupal 10.1 and some other scenarios not documented in the issue queue) and it mostly magically solved it. I could be wrong and the fixed issue #3384347: Remove entity id mapping config (and my multi-version setup) was also to blame and things work out with the current codebase.
Yes the fixed issue was the culprit as we changed the primary key there, but Meilisearch does not allow that when documents already exist. Hence this issue was opened.
It might even be easier for end users to automatically have them being recreated, as otherwise they would need to migrate the data over when switching Meilisearch versions (<1.0 to >1.0, if that even works?) but I have to look into this sometime.
The above restrictions sound like too much of a hassle only for making the upgrade process easier for the few people that might use it in production already.
Deleting the index and re-importing the config with drush is a matter of 2 minutes. I had upgrade paths that were a lot harder than this!This would be fine if Meilisearch indexes contain only data from Drupal and is most likely the case for 99% of the users, but if some custom documents were added from other sources (not in Drupal) that data would be lost and that is why I'm hesitant to go this route. As for migrating the data when upgrading Meilisearch - this is completely on Meilisearch side, there are upgrade guides on their official page but our module should work just fine. When I was testing 🐛 Invalid characters in filter values returns an error Fixed I had to switch versions and did data upgrades, this module still worked just fine with it.
I mean for me as a developer the easiest approach would be to do nothing and just say "Hey users just delete everything and recreate" but that sets a bad precedence (imo) for the quality of the code, product etc.
I'd consider 1.0.0 to only be something for the daring, so anyone really using it in production (is this anyone else but me?) should be OK to have a more elaborate update to what I'd probably call 2.0.0, if this eases future development and user friendliness.
My thinking here is that once we fix all the critical issues (without upgrading meilisearch php and support for never versions) I would make a 1.1.0 release supporting the Meilisearch v0.28.1 then create a new 2.x branch where we start upgrading meilisearch version support and make a 2.0.0 release for the Meilisearch v1.3 version.
I do have a few issues to add (from the top of my head I know at least one major issue exists with synonyms processor) that are blocking a new stable release, I will get to them when I find the time.
- 🇦🇹Austria tgoeg
Alright, understand.
Adding in data from other sources might indeed come into play later here, as well. Maybe someone indeed did that already. Though that would definitely be something I'd only start to tackle after 1.1.0 or more likely 2.x for me.Note however that 🐛 No results from file_extractor extracted data in Drupal 10.1 Closed: works as designed occurred already weeks ago, before the new primary key/"id" column issue (only hit this on the forward escape route as I thought an update might help). I will try to look into this soonish, probably when this issue here is fixed. (i.e., try an update of a cloned production instance from my patched-but-mostly-1.0.0 version to the latest dev-1.0.x)
I think dropping and recreating the index might still be necessary because of other aspects/bugs I cannot currently describe/reproduce any better. I'll let you know!
- First commit to issue fork.
- last update
about 1 year ago 109 pass - Status changed to Needs review
about 1 year ago 1:07pm 7 September 2023 - 🇸🇮Slovenia DeaOm
Changed the primary key back to id and added the validation also for index save. When you for example have no server selected or some other server that is not meili and the field is changed to id, then you decide to change the server to meili ti should throw an error, and not allow to save it. The validation for index field was added from the 🐛 Remove the possibility to add field with machine name id Fixed . Ready for testing.
- last update
about 1 year ago 109 pass - 🇸🇮Slovenia bcizej
Added presave hook to throw an exception if id field is defined on an index and the index uses Meilisearch. Also reworded the error messages to be more user friendly.
Tests revealed more issues connected that I had to fix:
- Special fields were not added to filterable and sortable attributes
- Setting backend configuration programatically would not update url or master key in the meilisearch api service
- last update
about 1 year ago 109 pass - 🇸🇮Slovenia DeaOm
The one issue I also encountered is, if you already have a meili server set up with an index that already has a field with the "id" name and you want to reindex it, it will reindex it, which is not correct. So added an event subscriber that checks if there is a field with the id set up, to prevent the indexing of that index.
- last update
about 1 year ago 109 pass - Status changed to Fixed
about 1 year ago 9:57pm 8 September 2023 Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.