Welcome to the Alloy Ideas Portal đź‘‹ Here, you'll be able to browse improvement ideas raised by our community, vote on ideas you agree with or even raise your own ideas. We review all ideas raised and we endeavour to respond to all raised ideas.
Any ideas submitted will be immediately visible on the portal for others to vote on, please do not include anything in your ideas you do not wish to be shared with others.
A new AQS parameter would be useful if we can have an opposite to "Contains word", similar to the "connected to" and "not connected to"
I can then have Layers / Searches where i can exclude specific words
Hi, thanks for raising this idea.
I'm afraid it's unlikely we would be able to implement this feature for AQS as the performance impact of running a search on "Does not Contain" would be significant for a collection with many items.
This may change eventually with improvements in the performance of the database technologies we use, but it's not likely in the near future.
Thanks again!
Hi,
Can we in Plymouth throw our hat in the ring for this to be looked into again? It's always really useful to have inverse conditionals when building workflows.
As it is, I can search for specific 'buzz words' using Contains to have the system send an email when an urgent case comes in, but I can't do the inverse to send another non-urgent email for cases that don't contain those words.
Also curious to know why searching for 'does not contain' is more intensive than 'does contain'? Surely either way in a database of N items the search algorithm still has to iterate N times to find all instances of the word, it can't stop early as it needs to search all items regardless. If it's capable of returning a list of items that do contain the word/words in question, can't we just use that functionality to return a list of items that's the original full list minus the items that do contain these words?