feat: catalog query filtering without elasticsearch

[johnnagro]

Description

Given a catalog query and some content metadata - can we determine if the content matches the query without using Elasticsearch (ie search/all)?

This will be useful when and if:

• crawl content once, determine catalogs from our copy (rather than re-crawl content for every query it belongs to)

• grind search/all less

• we want to process content metadata update events (from event bus)

• support catalog contents with similar query syntax but broader sources of content metadata (not everything in discovery)

• https://2u-internal.atlassian.net/browse/ENT-7712

Testing

• I wrote some tests
• i parsed all our production queries and they're syntactically valid based on this code
• if we like this, i'll write a job in prod to compare our query tool to Elasticsearch

[marlonkeating]

nit: Could put this in a dict to reduce duplication and allow adding more cases without further stacking the elif tower

Suggested change

	if raw_query_key == 'aggregration__key':
	return 'aggregation_key'
	elif raw_query_key == 'aggregation__key':
	return 'aggregation_key'
	elif raw_query_key == 'org__exempt':
	return 'org__exclude'
	corrections_for_typos = {
	'aggregation_key': ['aggregration__key', 'aggregation__key'],
	'org__exclude': ['org__exempt']
	}
	for correction, typos in corrections_for_typos.items():
	if raw_query in typos:
	return correction;

[marlonkeating]

raw_query_key.split("__") expression gets duplicated a couple times

Suggested change

	if len(raw_query_key.split("__")) == 2:
	field__comparison = raw_query_key.split("__")
	if len(field__comparison) == 2:

[marlonkeating]

Should the logic be reversed here? I would expect 'exact' matching to require matching all results.

[johnnagro]

its confusing but "exact" in this case is really mean to be more like "includes" so any of them need to match. if the course key is "edX+Demo" and the query key is like "course_key: [ "edX+Demo", "MIT+Demo"]" you'd want this to match where as the else case is an "excludes" which means NONE of them can match... lemme think about the right way to document this and/or if we need to code this so its easier to understand.