Add fieldType to AbstractQueryBuilder and SortBuilder

[dzane17]

Description

• Added fieldType class variable and getter methods in AbstractQueryBuilder and FieldSortBuilder.
• Added fieldName() as an abstract method in AbstractQueryBuilder. This requires all child classes to implement fieldName(). Child classes which do not already have a fieldName() method defined should call getDefaultFieldName() which returns null.

Related Issues

opensearch-project/query-insights#69

Check List

• Functionality includes testing.
• API changes companion pull request created, if applicable.
• Public documentation issue/PR created, if applicable.

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 095565f: 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 14ad54f: 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 3aaced4: 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 795c633: 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 ab96823: 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 a4235ca: UNSTABLE

Please review all flaky tests that succeeded after retry and create an issue if one does not already exist to track the flaky failure.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 93.75000% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 71.89%. Comparing base (1d5082e) to head (1b598e0).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...g/opensearch/index/query/AbstractQueryBuilder.java	66.66%	1 Missing ⚠️
...rg/opensearch/index/query/WrapperQueryBuilder.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
.../org/opensearch/search/sort/ScriptSortBuilder.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #15328      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     72.01%   71.89%   -0.12%     
- Complexity    63603    63609       +6     
============================================
  Files          5247     5247              
  Lines        297186   297355     +169     
  Branches      42939    42979      +40     
============================================
- Hits         214023   213790     -233     
- Misses        65610    65944     +334     
- Partials      17553    17621      +68     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[jainankitk]

This is also not a good way to solve the original problem.

Revert this change and go back to the drawing board with this.

We have had some discussion on this here - opensearch-project/query-insights#69. Let us know if you have any suggestions on improving this

The idea that a query type acts on a single field doesn't even make sense. What about MultiMatchQueryBuilder? What about a QueryStringQueryBuilder?

And that is the reason we have provided default implementation of fieldName method, so that such QueryBuilders can delegate to that. Maybe having default implementation instead of abstract is better, although new implementations of AbstractQueryBuilder don't necessarily need to implement in that case?

[msfroh]

This way we are not assuming anything about query builders. Naming the abstract method getSingleFieldNameIfExists() may be more accurate but I think we can brainstorm about that.

We are not adding an abstract method to AbstractQueryBuilder.

It breaks any plugin that implements a new query type.