[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3991?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15138987#comment-15138987
 ] 

Vikas Saurabh commented on OAK-3991:
------------------------------------

bq. The conversion from XPath to SQL-2 seems to be buggy in this case
Just to confirm, you mean that it should have further got broken down into 
another UNION clause? (semantically, it seems correct to me)

I was wondering, btw, even if it didn't break down into 4 unions, is it 
expected to lose constraints from the 3rd query (non-further-broken-down-one)? 
Should that not be a bug as well?

> Incorrect resultset from XPATH, multiple ORs and Lucene full-text
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-3991
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3991
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: lucene, query
>    Affects Versions: 1.2.10, 1.3.15
>            Reporter: Davide Giannella
>            Assignee: Thomas Mueller
>             Fix For: 1.3.16
>
>         Attachments: OAK-3991-test.patch
>
>
> In case of more complex xpath queries with a mix of ORs, ANDs and
> full-text the returned resultset is wrong. Some of the conditions are
> lost during the query execution. Most probably during the Filter
> creation.
> The query is:
> {noformat}
> /jcr:root/test//element(*, nt:unstructured)[ 
>   (
>     jcr:contains(., 'cinema') 
>     or @tags = 'architecture-keywords:building/cinema' 
>     or @tags = '/tags/architecture-keywords/building/cinema' 
>   ) 
>   and @status = 'amber' 
>   and ( 
>     not(@id) 
>     and ( not(@types) 
>     or (
>       not(@types = 'published') 
>       and not(@types = 'page') 
>       and not(@types = 'asset') 
>     ) 
>   )
> )]
> {noformat}
> In this case if you replace the @tags conditions with a
> {{jcr:contains}} rather than {{=}} it will make the query works. Which
> suggests the same root cause of OAK-2660.
> OAK-2660 was indirectly addressed by OAK-1617 but the OR->UNION
> conversion is not applied to subqueries of a UNION set.
> See [attached patch|^OAK-3991-test.patch] for a reproducing test case.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to