Closed Bug 536874 Opened 15 years ago Closed 14 years ago

[gloda] global search misses messages when search term matches partially

Categories

(Thunderbird :: Search, defect)

x86
Windows XP
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 523183

People

(Reporter: bugzilla, Unassigned)

Details

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.6) Gecko/20091201 Firefox/3.5.6 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729) Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.6) Gecko/20091201 Firefox/3.5.6 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729) Thunderbird includes a new message indexing and search system (gloda). For more details please see https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Thunderbird/gloda Gloda is accessed when Search Bar is set to "search all messages" and a search is performed. Problem: Search results may miss messages. They can only be found setting Search Bar to "search messages body filter" Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Compose a new mail containing the body text "You are so lateee mateee." 2. Send this message to yourself. 3. Set Search Bar to "search all messages" 4. Search for "latee" Actual Results: No message is found. Expected Results: Message should be found. If you set Search Bar to "search messages body filter", the message is found.
It is quite counter-intuitive that the "Search all messages" search method doesn't return *at least* the messages that are retrieved by the "Subject filter" search methods. Given the name of the methods, I would have thought that one search method is a proper generalisation of the other one; thus would have returned a proper result superset. Example: Mail with subject "www.blutspenden.ch" is found with search type "Subject filter" and search term "blut"; however it is not found with search type "Search all messages". [Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0]
Kuno, I tried your example and can confirm the behaviour you described. "Search all messages" finds the mail only when using the full search term "blutspenden". So this is another good example where gloda search misses a mail. Obviously gloda search matches complete words. A partial match at the beginning of a word is not enough. This is awkward.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Same problem exists with partial mail addresses. Example: received mail has the following header > From: SwissStockTicker <Info@SwissStockTicker2.net> Searching all messages for "swiss" does not include this message in results.
Summary: global search misses messages when search term matches partially → [gloda] global search misses messages when search term matches partially
Blocks: 523183
Are you still using folders instead of just using the search feature? http://vowe.net/archives/009441.html I think tagging and searching is the way to go. But for this to work TB has to improve the search feature.
This is the same thing as bug 523183 which has useful discussion on it. I've changed its subject to better reflect the problem and duping.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 14 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
No longer blocks: 523183
Andrew, I was aware of bug 523183. But as bug 523183 is quite broadly phrased (covering more than one problem), I filed this report to address one specific problem and I set this bug to block bug 523183, i.e. 523183 being the general bug and this one the more specialized one. Not a good idea?
(In reply to comment #6) > Not a good idea? From a bug filing perspective, absolutely a good idea and definitely appreciated. From a bug resolution perspective, I tend to dupe bugs together where the issues are fundamentally entangled and can really only be fixed in a single patch (and I am the most likely person to end up fixing them or answering questions about them so it makes sense to assert my preferences). Thanks to the wisdom of wsm, I've come to accept dupes as a generally positive outcome because it helps people find the bug that will actually be worked on; at least when the search includes dupes, you are much more likely to match the alternate phrasings of the various duplicate bugs and from there be funneled to the worked one. Which is to say, I both think we did the right thing in this case :)
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.