Feature/437 document text search

[maxdiebold-erg]

Related Issues:

• EQ-437
• EQ-455

Main Changes:

• Added a new "Action Documents" profile. This is made up of two ATTAINS-provided tables and one derived text search vector table, allowing for queries against full documents.
  • The user-facing "profile" is a view of the relevant fields from the three tables.
• Added a "preview" button to the UI that is only shown for the Action Documents profile (for now). This displays the results in a sortable table, and is limited to 500 rows.
• Updated the api-public file with the new profile endpoints.

Steps To Test:

1. Go to http://localhost:3000/attains/actionDocuments.
2. Type some text into the SEARCH TEXT / KEYWORD field, and click "Preview". Confirm results are shown in a table, or an empty result message is shown.
3. Close the modal, then click "Download". Confirm the result count matches the preview. Proceed with the download, and inspect the downloaded file. It should contain a superset of the previewed columns.
4. Run some queries against the API, and verify they function as expected.
5. Check the API documentation (http://localhost:3000/api-documentation) for correctness.

TODO:

• Move as much to config as possible, especially the field specifiers in the PreviewModal component.

[cschwinderg]

This is awesome and works well!

I left some small suggestions/comments below. I think we need to add some cypress tests around the document search. I'm ok with the tests being a separate PR/ticket.

[cschwinderg]

I just started looking at the changes and noticed that the querying of the original profiles doesn't work any more. The filters aren't filtering anything and the download only has the objectId column.

[cschwinderg]

It looks like the issue is just with the actions profile.

[maxdiebold-erg]

I made some changes to the client-side profiles.json config yesterday, and somehow missed the Actions profile. It should be fixed now.

[cschwinderg]

The Any option in the Reporting Cycle field is no longer in the list. Other than that, I think the changes look good.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
0.0% Coverage on New Code (required ≥ 80%)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[cschwinderg]

Thanks for making those changes.