feat: filters are not search aware by default; accelerated by MV#2272
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: eb53d1e The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 4 packages
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
🔴 Tier 4 — CriticalTouches auth, data models, config, tasks, OTel pipeline, ClickHouse, or CI/CD. Why this tier:
Review process: Deep review from a domain expert. Synchronous walkthrough may be required. Stats
|
E2E Test Results✅ All tests passed • 176 passed • 3 skipped • 1257s
Tests ran across 4 shards in parallel. |
PR ReviewReviewed the filters MV usage PR (1150 additions across 22 files). The design is solid — combined key+value rollup query, dual-pipeline UX toggle, settings reset via
No blocking security issues. The two |
Deep ReviewThis PR makes filters non-search-aware by default (localStorage 🔴 P0/P1 -- must fix
🟡 P2 -- recommended
🔵 P3 nitpicks (13)
Reviewers (9): correctness, testing, maintainability, project-standards, performance, api-contract, reliability, adversarial, kieran-typescript. Testing gaps:
|
|
@knudtty looks to be a real E2E failure here |
I wonder if we could use |
I wasn't sure if we should surface most common values or not, I figured that can be an improvement later if we desire |
Summary
Filters now are not search aware by default. They can/will use metadata MVs if available.
How to test on local
Steps:
yarn devReferences