mirror of
https://github.com/infiniflow/ragflow.git
synced 2026-02-06 18:45:08 +08:00
90b726c988
## Description
This PR fixes the issue where date metadata conditions with comparison
operators (`>=`, `<=`, `>`, `<`) did not work correctly in the
`/api/v1/retrieval` endpoint.
## Problem
When using metadata conditions like:
```json
{
"metadata_condition": {
"conditions": [
{
"name": "date",
"comparison_operator": ">=",
"value": "2027-01-13"
}
]
}
}
The filtering did not work as expected because:
1. Operators >= and <= were not mapped to internal symbols ≥ and ≤
2. Date strings like "2027-01-13" failed to parse with
ast.literal_eval()
3. Non-standard date formats were incorrectly compared as strings
Solution
Changes in common/metadata_utils.py:
1. Added operator mapping in convert_conditions():
- >= → ≥
- <= → ≤
- != → ≠
2. Implemented strict date format detection in meta_filter():
- Only processes dates in YYYY-MM-DD format (10 characters, properly
formatted)
- When query value is a date, only matches data in the same standard
format
- Non-standard formats (e.g., "2026年1月13日", "2026-1-22") are skipped
3. Maintained backward compatibility:
- Numeric comparisons still work
- String comparisons still work
- Only affects date-formatted queries
Testing
All test cases pass (8/8):
- ✅ Date >= comparison
- ✅ Date > comparison
- ✅ Date < comparison
- ✅ Date <= comparison
- ✅ Date = comparison
- ✅ Date range queries
- ✅ Non-date string comparison (backward compatibility)
- ✅ Numeric comparison (backward compatibility)
Example Usage
{
"dataset_ids": ["xxx"],
"question": "test",
"metadata_condition": {
"conditions": [
{
"name": "date",
"comparison_operator": ">=",
"value": "2027-01-13"
}
]
}
}
Notes
- Only supports standard YYYY-MM-DD format
- Non-standard date formats in data are treated as data quality issues
and will not match
- Users should ensure their date metadata is in the correct format
---------
Co-authored-by: Clint-chan <Clint-chan@users.noreply.github.com>