Document that contextual filters are included in the first "and/or" filter group [#1242424]

The WHERE clause generated by a contextual filters is always grouped with the first "and/or" group of static filters. Thus the order of the "and/or" filter-groups is significant, and re-ordering them changes the semantic of contextual filter(s) entirely—not just how it is rendered into a SQL query.

Is this a bug?

If it is a feature, might the feature change or be removed in the future? Since the GUI does not communicate this at all, is it documented anywhere?

If there are multiple contextual filters, they can not be assigned to different "and/or" groups. Is that a bug?

Comment	File	Size	Author
#4	1242424-document_contextual_filter_grouping.patch	1.22 KB	Bevan
#4

Support from Acquia helps fund testing for Drupal Acquia logo

Comments

Comment #1

dawehner

German

CreditAttribution: dawehner commented 8 August 2011 at 05:17

Well that's currently a know behaviour and would probably require to edit all argument handlers.

In general this would be solved one day by using #357082: Pull filter value from an argument? because then you can move around your filters/filters prefilled with arguments as you wish.

Feel free to document the current behaviour.


If there are multiple contextual filters, they can not be assigned to different "and/or" groups. Is that a bug?

Just to clarify this, you are right, this is not possible at the moment.

The underlying problem is that in handler/views_handler_argument.inc $this->add_where(0, ...) is done.

Comment #2

Bevan CreditAttribution: Bevan commented 8 August 2011 at 06:08

Does #357082 add a UI for ordering and grouping contextual filters? That is the best place to document this behaviour.

In the meantime, where would be a good place to document the current behaviour? Or is this just duplicate?

Comment #3

dawehner

German

CreditAttribution: dawehner commented 8 August 2011 at 07:02

#357082: Pull filter value from an argument? will allow to pull filter values from arguments.

So basically you sort/or-sort the filters as before. Perhaps help/argument.html is the right place to document it.

Comment #4

Bevan CreditAttribution: Bevan commented 9 August 2011 at 00:13

Title:	Contextual filters added to first "and/or" static filter group	» Document that contextual filters are included in the first "and/or" filter group
Status:	Active	» Needs review

File	Size
1242424-document_contextual_filter_grouping.patch	1.22 KB

The attached patch adds the following documentation to help/argument.html:

Grouping of contextual filters

Even though contextual filters do not appear in the "and/or" user interface for sorting and grouping regular filters, contextual filters are always added to the first group of filters. Thus the order of the groups can cause the contextual filter to have entirely different effects on the results of a view that has contextual filters. Even though differences might not be apparent through the user interface.

Multiple contextual filters are therefore always in the same "and/or" group of filters, and can not be placed in different groups. There is an effort to add this feature.

Comment #5

dawehner

German

CreditAttribution: dawehner commented 12 August 2011 at 21:13

Status:

Needs review

» Fixed

Thanks for clarifing this!
Commited to 7.x-3.x

Comment #6

26 August 2011 at 21:22

Status:

Fixed

» Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.

Comment #7

jackbravo CreditAttribution: jackbravo commented 14 November 2012 at 15:09

Version:	7.x-3.x-dev	» 7.x-3.5
Status:	Closed (fixed)	» Active

I believe this is no longer the case. I created a view. Added two contextual filters and two normal filters. On the filter and/or interface I set the filters to be in just one group and separated by or. On my query this is how the filters appear (this is a term view):

WHERE (( (taxonomy_term_hierarchy.parent = '636' ) AND (field_data_field_section.field_section_tid = '636' ) )AND(( (taxonomy_term_data.vid IN  ('1')) OR (taxonomy_term_data.vid IN  ('1')) )))

(I added two taxonomy vocabulary filters just so it would be easier). So the documentation seems to be wrong.