test: update filtering of Pinecone mock to imitate doc store

[jamescalam]

Related Issues

• Part of Update the PineconeDocumentStore #2646

Proposed Changes:

1. Filtering

The previous part-Pinecone part-SQL PineconeDocumentStore used the SQL db for many filtering tasks. With the update to a pure-Pinecone document store in #2749 this is no longer the case.

That means that during tests, filtering in the new PineconeDocumentStore relies solely on the filtering in the Pinecone mock instance. Unfortunately, this didn't work for more complex filters. This PR includes a new filtering function to handle these more complex filters.

2. update method

Another need stemming from the pure-Pinecone document store is the need to handle labels without SQL. Part of the implementation for this includes the use of Pinecone's update method, which was not originally included in the mock. It has been added here.

How did you test it?

Manual verification, unit tests

Notes for the reviewer

N/A

Checklist

• I have read the contributors guidelines and the code of conduct
• I have updated the related issue with new insights and changes
• I added tests that demonstrate the correct behavior of the change
• I've used the conventional commit convention for my PR title
• I documented my code
• I ran pre-commit hooks and fixed any issue

[ZanSara]

I had a rough pass for style and found a few occasions to use my favorite set operators 😄 No need to address those comments if you don't like them. I know some people have strong feelings on these operators...

I will pause the actual review of _filter because I realized that we can imitate InMemoryDocumentStore and rather leverage LogicalFilterClause to perform filtering in this mock, as done here:

haystack/haystack/document_stores/memory.py

Lines 536 to 538 in aafa017

	if filters:
	parsed_filter = LogicalFilterClause.parse(filters)
	filtered_documents = list(filter(lambda doc: parsed_filter.evaluate(doc.meta), documents))

Please give it a try and let me know if it works or if we should stick to your filtering implementation.

[ZanSara]

I will merge this for now to test it on the other Pinecone PR, and eventually change the filters implementation there. Thanks!