Introduce ApproximateRangeQuery and ApproximateableQuery

[harshavamsi]

Description

Most of the logic is as per #13566. I've introduced a new ApproximateableQuery that is virtually similar to what IndexOrDocValues does today. It returns either an originalQuery or an approximateQuery. During search time we evaluate if a query matches a particular requirement for it to be rewritten from originalQuery to approximateQuery. Here I started off with just converting the DateRangeQuery to use the approximation. If we have a top level range query on a date field, we will approximate the results by only scoring 10K or size.

Related Issues

Resolves #11251 #9541 #13566

Check List

• New functionality includes testing.
  • All tests pass
• New functionality has been documented.
  • New functionality has javadoc added
• API changes companion pull request created.
• Failing checks are inspected and point to the corresponding known issue(s) (See: Troubleshooting Failing Builds)
• Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff
• Commit changes are listed out in CHANGELOG.md file (See: Changelog)
• Public documentation issue/PR created

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 95236d6: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for c98b56c: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 76b4abe: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 76b4abe: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 2cf5e27: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 090ddc6: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[github-actions]

❌ Gradle check result for 9ac309a: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

[msfroh]

I tried retrying the Mend Security Check, but that doesn't seem to be working.

As mentioned by @harshavamsi above, the bulk of the uncovered code is copy/pasted from PointRangeQuery.

Merging...

[opensearch-trigger-bot]

The backport to 2.x failed:

The process '/usr/bin/git' failed with exit code 128

To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal:

# Navigate to the root of your repository
cd $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
# Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add ../.worktrees/OpenSearch/backport-2.x 2.x
# Navigate to the new working tree
pushd ../.worktrees/OpenSearch/backport-2.x
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport/backport-13788-to-2.x
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 2e9db40a50735eacc95a4fc8926e8bb7042a696a
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport/backport-13788-to-2.x
# Go back to the original working tree
popd
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove ../.worktrees/OpenSearch/backport-2.x

Then, create a pull request where the base branch is 2.x and the compare/head branch is backport/backport-13788-to-2.x.

[jainankitk]

As mentioned by @harshavamsi above, the bulk of the uncovered code is copy/pasted from PointRangeQuery.

Merging...

Ideally we should avoid copy/pasting code, but I also don't see good way until PointRangeQuery is more extensible. Was hoping to do this sooner, finally got around to apache/lucene#13711.

[rishabh6788]

hmm, we're not seeing any difference in benchmarks because this is behind a feature flag

You can create a new config, see f351c01 for concurrent search feature.
@harshavamsi