Adapt filters with empty and null values in alphanumeric custom fields

[CsarRamos]

Overview

Hello,

I have created a group of custom fields and a new custom field type "Alphanumeric". Then I have created two contacts without assigning them any value in the custom field. Finally I have tried to filter the field in the reports as "is empty (NULL)" and the report shows only the null results. (When the contact is created it is assigned as empty)

Before

Reports don't filter with empty values in alphanumeric custom fields

After

The reports filter with empty values and null values in alphanumeric fields (Include default fields, ex: contact source)

Comments

issue: https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2173

[civibot]

(Standard links)

• If this is your first pull-request for CiviCRM, please browse CONTRIBUTING.md for information about the development and testing processes.
• If you are reviewing this pull-request, you may wish to consult the test sites and the Review Standards (long template, short template).

[eileenmcnaughton]

@CsarRamos the test fail relates - I think the metadata you are using might not always be set. I think the change probably makes sense

ping @yashodha @MegaphoneJon

[eileenmcnaughton]

@MegaphoneJon @yashodha I'm inclined to merge this - looks good to you?

[MegaphoneJon]

@CsarRamos @eileenmcnaughton What effect will adding an OR to the SQL here have on the ability to use indices?

[eileenmcnaughton]

@MegaphoneJon the OR problem with indices are when the OR is on 2 field in separate tables

[MegaphoneJon]

Thanks Eileen. I haven't r-run this but I reviewed the code, and conceptually I approve of the change. My only concern is that the user-facing label is is empty (NULL) when is empty would be more accurate after this change - but that's a pretty minor nitpick.

[eileenmcnaughton]

I was able to r-run this - I agree the null thing in the label is a bit misleading now - but it does work as described and it seems more intuitive