Motivation
----------
Each database served keeps a full registry in a process-wide LRU. The LRU is bounded by a count, so on a server hosting thousands of databases the number of retained registries follows traffic rather than memory pressure. Their combined footprint can push a worker past its virtual-memory soft limit, at which point it is killed and restarted.

On a server with ~2500 databases, the soft limit is reached at ~180 resident databases while the LRU could still hold ~210, so HTTP workers were being recycled under normal load.

Tracking usage
--------------
Every request for a registry goes through the single lookup in the registry constructor, which now stamps it with a monotonic timestamp; the stamp is also set when a registry is first built.

Collecting idle registries
--------------------------
A collection pass drops every registry whose last use is older than the configured idle timeout. It runs at the end of registry loading, so it fires periodically as databases come and go.

Registries that are still loading are skipped, so a concurrent build is never collected. Dropping a registry only detaches it from the LRU: a request still holding a reference keeps working, and the next lookup rebuilds it.

The timeout is read from ODOO_REGISTRY_MAX_IDLE_TIMEOUT, in seconds; a value of zero, the default, disables the mechanism so behaviour is unchanged unless it is opted into.

Results
-------
With a five-minute timeout on the same ~2500-database server, the HTTP workers settle at around 40 resident registries instead of saturating memory on the long run. The gevent worker, which sees every web client reconnect at startup and briefly fills the LRU with ~150 databases, releases most of them on the first pass, reclaiming the memory.

On a real-life SaaS server with 64GB of RAM, that frees up to ~10GB which were previously taken by unused registries in the LRU. It comes at the expense of extra registry recomputes, but on the other hand workers do not reach their virtual memory limit anymore.

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Steps to reproduce:
1 Install documents_hr and hr_sign on saas-19.1.
2 Go to Settings → Documents → disable Human Resources. 
3 Open the Documents app and delete the Employees - My Company folder. 
4 Upgrade the database to saas-19.2.

Issue:
- During the upgrade, the post-init hook attempts to embed the HR Sign action into predefined document folders. Since the Employees - My Company folder has been deleted (or is inactive), the folder lookup returns no record, leading to the following error:

```python3
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/service/server.py", line 1664, in preload_registries
    registry = Registry.new(dbname, update_module=update_module, install_modules=config['init'], upgrade_modules=config['update'], reinit_modules=config['reinit'])
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/tools/func.py", line 65, in locked
    return func(inst, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 186, in new
    load_modules(
  File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/modules/loading.py", line 465, in load_modules
    load_module_graph(
  File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/modules/loading.py", line 244, in load_module_graph
    getattr(py_module, post_init)(env)
  File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/documents_hr_sign/__init__.py", line 12, in _embed_sign_post_init
    folders.with_user(SUPERUSER_ID)._embed_action(sign_action.id)
  File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/documents/models/documents_document.py", line 1643, in _embed_action
    folder.action_folder_embed_action(folder.id, action_id)
  File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/documents/models/documents_document.py", line 1614, in action_folder_embed_action
    return self.get_documents_actions(folder_id)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/documents/models/documents_document.py", line 1522, in get_documents_actions
    raise UserError(_('This folder does not exist or is not accessible.'))
odoo.exceptions.UserError: Esta carpeta no existe o no es accesible.
```

Root cause:
- As part of documents_sign, the documents_hr_sign action is embedded into predefined document folders (introduced in https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/101890).
- The folder lookup relies on [_search()](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/85992d5f5f8caeacdcc570fb9fefb4cfcec6460c/odoo/orm/models.py#L4681-L4691), which filters out inactive records 
  through the active test. Consequently, [search_fetch()](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/85992d5f5f8caeacdcc570fb9fefb4cfcec6460c/odoo/orm/models.py#L1441-L1451) returns no matching

  folder when the predefined folder has been deleted or deactivated.  It will
  try to get document actions of predefined folder here, so if the folder is
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6d334a17d10faec33d60f4a8d7d263c091bb456e/documents/models/documents_document.py#L1592
  inactive it will not be able to read the folder here.
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6d334a17d10faec33d60f4a8d7d263c091bb456e/documents/models/documents_document.py#L1494

Fix:
- Instead of attempting to embed the Sign action into all company employee folders, filter out inactive folders before calling _embed_action().

- This ensures the post-init hook only processes active employee document folders. If a predefined folder has been deleted or deactivated, it is skipped preventing the upgrade from attempting to embed an action into an inaccessible folder and avoiding the resulting UserError.

opw-6358063
upg-4449902

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123846

Steps to reproduce:
- Set the user language to Dutch.
- Go to Accounting > Reporting > Annual Statements.
- Generate the XBRL export for a report other than the "company,
  abridged" (acon) balance sheet/P&L combination, e.g. an association
  (asso_a/asso_f) or "company, full"/"company, capital" report.
- Open the file: the `<met:bln1>` boolean facts are exported as
  "onwaar" instead of "false", which is not a valid XBRL boolean
  lexical value and gets rejected by the NBB validator.

Cause of the issue:
QWeb templates translate static text nodes by default. The base
module ships a generic `msgid "false" -> msgstr "onwaar"` translation,
used elsewhere in the UI, which silently hijacks the literal
"false"/"true" and unit tokens ("iso4217:EUR", "pure") in the XBRL
data templates whenever the file is generated in Dutch.

Solution:
Add `t-translation="off"` on the `<met:bln1>` boolean facts and the
`<measure>` unit tokens in the 5 remaining XBRL templates,
so these fixed-vocabulary XBRL values are never subject to translation

opw-6395785

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124945

To reproduce the issue:

1) Initialize a company in Belgium, create the tax returns 2) Submit the VAT return from January
3) Open the lock date wizard. The tax lock date is January 31st. 4) Add a lock date exception removing the tax lock date just for you, for 5 min. 5) Reset January's return
6) Reopen the lock date wizard.
    ====> Your exception is still there, but the tax lock date for everyone has been reset to December 31st.

This is plain wrong. Resetting a return should not automatically reopen the period for everyone. Lock dates exceptions/modifications are anyway required to reset the return ; they should pilot the whole flow. Nothing being magically hidden from the user means there can't be someone else mistakenly encoding something into the reopened period.

Another fix was required to make this one work: setting the tax lock date before submitting the return should work. In bigger environments, users might want to do that as a first step to reduce the number of people encoding data before actually doing the submission of the return. Therefore, the case where the tax lock date is already set at the date_to of the return when submitting it was supposed to be already supported, and allow the creation of the closing entry for that return, despite it being on the tax lock date. The test ensuring this was however badly written, and the feature didn't work: the closing was created at a later date than the lock date automatically, due to the Bills' Algorithm.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124872
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124811

`pos_amount_unsettled` is a stored computed field defined as the invoice's residual minus the settle lines belonging to sessions that are not yet closed. Its compute method filters the lines on `order_id.session_id.state`, but that state is not in the compute dependencies.

When closing a session holding a settle order, `_validate_session()` first reconciles the settle payment with the invoice (which lowers `amount_residual_signed` and flags the field for recomputation) and only then writes `state = 'closed'` on the session. If the pending recomputation is executed in that window (any flush of `account.move` does it: recomputing the field for any other flagged record drags the whole queue along), the settle line is deducted from the already reconciled residual, i.e. counted twice, and the field is stored as `residual - settled` instead of `residual`. Since the session state is not a dependency, writing `state = 'closed'` does not flag the field again and the wrong value is never corrected.

The partner's `invoices_amount_due` then goes negative, which hides the "Settle invoices" option in the POS partner list and inflates the "Settle due amount" proposal
(`remainingDue = total_due - pos_orders_amount_due - invoices_amount_due`): a customer owing e.g. 500 is proposed, and charged, 700.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Post a customer invoice of 1000.
2. In the POS, select the customer > Settle invoices, pick the invoice, set the amount to 700 and pay in cash.
3. Close the session. The issue only occurs when the pending recomputation runs during the closing, which depends on the other operations performed by it (not deterministic in real usage; the regression test forces it with a flush after the reconciliation).
4. The invoice's "Amount To Pay In POS" shows -400 instead of 300 and the POS proposes to settle 700 instead of 300.

Add the session state to the compute dependencies so that the field is recomputed once the session is closed, yielding the correct amount regardless of any intermediate recomputation.

opw-6375095

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123783

[FIX] documents_{hr|sign}: employee docs button for signed contracts
Bug reproduction:

1 - In saas-19.4, install documents_hr and hr_contract_salary with demo data
2 - As Mitchell Admin, go to Employees, open one, click on "Offers - New"
3 - Select employee_contract.pdf as PDF Template
4 - Use the button "Salary configurator" to fill in the configurator, review it and sign it.
5 - Go back to the backend, find the contract in Sign and sign it.
6 - Go back to the Employee form view, the Documents stat button shows 0 document when it should be 1.
7 - Click the stat button and you see 0 documents in Documents when there should be one.

Bug cause:

1 - The document is created for the employee in documents app
    but smart button cannot open those
2 - The res_model of the documents.document is hr.version for signed doc
    -> it is not hr.employee
3 - In current implementation:
    3.1 -> only hr.employee's documents appear after that smart button

Bug solution:

1 - _compute_document_count is reimplemented:
    -> to count also documents with res_model as hr.version
2 - override _get_documents_domain:
    -> to add version domain as an alternative with OR
        -> to get documents with res_model='hr.version'

Test:

1 - Unit test is added
2 - Create documents with the archived versions of the employee
    -> and observe the document count of the employee

Note:

-> Also, we changed the final document name in documents of the employee

task-6373620

Steps to reproduce
---
1. Enable Packages and turn on "Move Entire Packages" on the delivery operation type.
2. Create a storable product P and add 2 units in different package in stock: 1 in PACK001, 1 in PACK002 
3. In the Barcode app > Operations > Delivery > New
4. Scan a first package PACK001, then a second different package PACK002
5. Scan the first package PACK001 again.

Issue
---
Re-scanning an already scanned package is meant to be rejected with a "This package is already scanned." warning, but the rejection stops working as soon as a second package is present in the transfer, so the package content gets added a second time and, once validated, the source quant goes negative (the package ends up holding a negative and a positive quant of the same product).

Commit 23613c63947 added a canPackSomeLines flag that is set to true for every package line that is not the scanned one, so any other package in the transfer makes the alreadyDonePackId && !canPackSomeLines guard false and silently skips the warning. The scanned package already exposes whether it had something left to pack through scannedPackages, so gating the warning on that flag instead keeps the check working regardless of how many other packages are in the transfer.

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3cc1a162e61662814b0e52c0c720831952d208a8/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L1976-L2006

opw-6279105

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125229
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121755

## Problem
When generating accrual entries for multiple sale orders, the stock variation lines would all show the same order name, even if the line belonged to a different sale order. This is caused by the `order` variable being reused from a previous loop.

## Solution
We will pull the order name directly from the order line in the current iteration.

## Steps to reproduce (Runbot v19)
1. Create a product with AVCO perpetual valuation
2. Make sure all accounts are configured properly (Income, Expense, Stock, and stock variation accounts)
3. Add units to the stock (it can be with an adjustment, as long as the product has a cost already set)
4. Create 2 separate sales orders for this product
5. Deliver both of the sales orders, do not invoice them
6. Now go to the Accounting App Review>Invoices to be issued
7. Select the 2 invoices that were created.

The Revenue accrual lines are correct, with each SO being referenced, but on the Stock variation lines, only the last SO selected will appear.

opw-6361032

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277058

Before this commit, the maximum weight and volume allowed on a delivery method were checked against transfers using the quantity in the unit of the move, while the weight and volume of a product are expressed per reference unit. The same checks on sale orders already use the quantity in the reference unit.

Steps to reproduce:
- create a delivery method with a maximum weight of 10 kg
- create a product in Units weighing 1 kg with Dozens in its allowed units
- create a delivery transfer of 2 Dozen of the product and select the carrier on the transfer

The 24 kg shipment is weighed as 2 kg, so the carrier is proposed on the transfer although it exceeds its maximum weight, and it is correctly refused on a sale order for the same quantity. With a unit smaller than the reference one, valid carriers are hidden instead.

Solution:
Use the quantity in the reference unit of the product, as done for sale orders and everywhere else the shipment weight is computed.


---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277708
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277425

Before this commit, the journal and the memo of a payment linked to a company-paid expense report could be modified although such payments must be kept consistent with their expense report: a missing comma in the set of protected fields merged 'journal_id' and 'ref' into a single meaningless entry. The memo was also left editable because the set still referred to 'ref', which was renamed to 'memo'.

Steps to reproduce:
- submit, approve and post an expense paid by company
- open the payment created for the expense report
- edit the memo or the journal and save, then try to edit the date

Editing the date is refused with "You cannot do this modification since the payment is linked to an expense report", while the memo and journal changes are silently accepted.

Solution:
Restore the missing comma and protect the renamed memo field.

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277737
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277423

The builder HOOT tests were flaky when run as a suite while passing in isolation:
- @website/builder/images: "Should format an image to be 800px", "should set the quality of an image to 50", and the gif/svg "Correct options appear..." tests,
- @html_builder/image: "Size should not be displayed on CORS protected images".

All failed the same way: a `contains(":iframe ... img")` click found the img but "0 visible elements" after 200ms, i.e. the image never got pixels in time. The images of those tests are loaded by the browser from the *real* test server (element loads cannot be mocked by HOOT), and the requests were stuck for seconds behind other requests started by earlier tests and never awaited:

- test fixtures used made-up snippet thumbnails (data-oe-thumbnail="a.svg", or none at all, rendering "background-image: url(undefined)"). Relative to the test runner page, these resolve to /web/a.svg, /web/undefined... and each triggers a full website 404 page rendering on the server (~90 queries, taking seconds under load). One full @html_builder run produced 71 such requests, some taking up to 17s, starving the browser's connection pool.
- the mock of /html_editor/modify_image in "Save image with correct parameter" returned the obsolete {image_src, access_token, public} shape; saveModifiedImage reads newAttachmentUrls["original"], so the saved img src became the literal string "undefined" -> GET /web/undefined.
- the mocked attachment creations in the pasted/dropped image tests returned made-up URLs (/test_image_url.png, /url_image-1.png) that the editor sets as img src on save -> more expensive 404s.

Fix:
- don't render a background-image at all when a snippet has no thumbnail (also avoids the bogus url(undefined) request outside of tests),
- use a data URI as thumbnail in the default test fixtures,
- return the correct modify_image response shape, and existing static images (served in milliseconds) for the mocked attachment URLs,
- give the CORS-protected test image explicit width/height so that its visibility (checked before clicking it) does not depend on the server's response time at all.

Note that these failures predate the owl v3.0.0-alpha.44 update (they reproduce identically on the commit before it): repeatedly running the full suites while investigating the update's fallout simply surfaced them.

@html_builder went from 71 to 7 stray 404s (the few remaining come from fixtures whose thumbnail names are asserted on, they are harmless in isolation), and both @html_builder (395 tests) and @website/builder (557 tests) suites now pass reliably.

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**
----------------------------------------------
On mobile devices, the meeting view had two UI issues affecting the call
experience.
The call permission dialog could display an unwanted focus outline around
its content because the dialog body was focused on touch devices.
Additionally, meeting action buttons could be partially hidden,
especially in portrait mode, as the meeting view could extend beyond the
visible viewport height.

**Current behavior before PR:**
----------------------------------------------
- Opening the call permission dialog on mobile could show an unwanted
  focus outline around the dialog content
- Meeting action buttons could be partially hidden on mobile devices
- In portrait mode, the footer could overflow below the visible viewport


**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**
----------------------------------------------
- Call permission dialog opens on mobile without showing the unwanted
focus outline on main body.
- Meeting action buttons remain fully visible on mobile devices


Task-6232825

----------------------------------------------
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266620

### Contains the following commits:

https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/6b3c312b61 [REL] 19.4.4 [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/44717e7739 [FIX] autofill: hide autofill handler when selection is hidden [Task: 6317808](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6317808)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/0ad7a9fe3c [FIX] HeaderVisibility: fix `getNextVisibleCellPosition` getter [Task: 6340589](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6340589)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/1758ce502e [FIX] edition: do not change edition if not editing [Task: 6340589](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6340589)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/d835cd31d4 [FIX] table computed style: fix render table [Task: 6396322](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6396322)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/936aebdd54 [FIX] index: export `positionMap` [Task: 6159213](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6159213)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/a2c2775656 [FIX] Pivots: cache `getPivotIdFromPosition` for performance [Task: 6159213](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6159213)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/45361d9f8c [FIX] collaborative: add sheetId as argument to `getClientsToDisplay` [Task: 6408720](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6408720)

Co-authored-by: Florian Damhaut (flda) <flda@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Anthony Hendrickx (anhe) <anhe@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Alexis Lacroix (laa) <laa@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Lucas Lefèvre (lul) <lul@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Adrien Minne (adrm) <adrm@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Ronak Mukeshbhai Bharadiya (rmbh) <rmbh@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Dhrutik Patel (dhrp) <dhrp@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Rémi Rahir (rar) <rar@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Pierre Rousseau (pro) <pro@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Vincent Schippefilt (vsc) <vsc@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Marceline Thomas (matho) <matho@odoo.com>

In the "test_add_new_line_in_detailled_op" tour, the quantity of the last row of the Detailed Operations list is edited and then blurred with "press Tab".

Tab on the last editable cell of the last row of an x2many list is a generic list view feature that triggers "add a line" (so users can quickly fill in several rows in a row). For this specific field (lot/serial tracked quants), "add a line" opens the "Add line: <product>" selection wizard instead of an empty row.

This wizard stacks on top of the "Detailed Operations" dialog, which makes the next tour step fail: it finds the footer total but refuses to click it since it is now covered by a modal.

Blur the field with "click body" instead, as already done for other steps of this tour, so it does not trigger "add a line".

tour_tag: .test_add_new_line_in_detailled_op

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

# How to reproduce
- Enable Cloudflare Turnstile in Settings > Integrations
- Add a CF Site Key & a CF Secret Key. e.g. :
	- `1x00000000000000000000AA`
	- `1x0000000000000000000000000000000AA` 
(See : https://developers.cloudflare.com/turnstile/troubleshooting/testing/)
- Go to a Website page with a form
- Add `?cf=show` to the URL
- Open the browser console
- Search the dom for an element with s_turnstile_container
- Look for the `data-appearance` attribute

# The issue
`data-appearance` is set to `interaction-only` but should be `always` according to :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1e73172b51cd673c3414187af4f98304921ed7b3/addons/website_cf_turnstile/static/src/interactions/turnstile.js#L8-L12

# Cause
`appearance` is misspelled in the template :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1e73172b51cd673c3414187af4f98304921ed7b3/addons/website_cf_turnstile/static/src/interactions/turnstile.xml#L7

Documentation on the Appearance modes for Turnstile : https://developers.cloudflare.com/turnstile/get-started/client-side-rendering/widget-configurations/#appearance-modes

opw-6359977

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275077

Steps to reproduce
1. Go to Website Settings.
2. Configure the "Contact Us" form to create an Opportunity.
3. Select a "Default Sales Team" (ensure this team has a Team Leader set).
4. Leave the "Default Salesperson" field empty (None).
5. Submit the "Contact Us" form on the website.

Current behavior
The resulting Opportunity is automatically assigned to the Team Leader.

Expected behavior
The Opportunity should remain unassigned, respecting the empty
"Default Salesperson" configuration.

Issue
In https://github.com/odoo-dev/odoo/commit/d136e79d1ea0a4793ba9d447603e6f0e29b40770, a fallback was introduced to
explicitly assign the Team Leader (`team_id.user_id`) whenever a team was
present but a salesperson was not, provided rule-based assignment was disabled:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d136e79d1ea0a4793ba9d447603e6f0e29b40770/addons/website_crm/models/crm_lead.py#L55-L56

This incorrectly overrides the intentional configuration in the website
settings. Additionally, in https://github.com/odoo-dev/odoo/commit/ba6a5ddc8dec971f8b810dfad3d9934e7b581c91, the
website_form_input_filter was made to fall back to request.website.crm_default_team_id
and crm_default_user_id when the form did not submit those fields:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ba6a5ddc8dec971f8b810dfad3d9934e7b581c91/addons/website_crm/models/crm_lead.py#L14-L17

The Contact Us form already passes the configured team and salesperson as
hidden inputs. When they are not configured, nothing is submitted for those
fields. The fallback to request.website caused leads to be assigned a team
even when neither field was intentionally configured, because crm_default_team_id
defaults to the first sales team on website creation.

opw-6050663

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#257134

Before this commit, calls to the route `/shop?search=<search_term>` would lead the search for `product_public_categories` to use a query in the shape of `product_id in (<list_of_ids>)`.
In the case where the cardinality of the product table becomes large (> 10k products), if `search_term` is very broad-spectrum, the length of `list_of_ids` reaches the size of the product table.
In that case the query generated to search for categories becomes significantly slow to parse (> 14 seconds in our tests).

This commit proposes as an alternative to resort to a sub-query to fetch the product ids that are relevant in the context of `product_public_categories`. Because of how the list of products is acquired initially, we can't rely on the `_search()` method to generate the sub-query.

The following table shows average gains for "increasing search term specificity". Here, "specificity" is determined by the amount of characters in the search term and the related number of hits expected from the search.

### Cardinality ~250k records
| Metric | ~228,872 hits | ~2,870 hits | ~377 hits | ~11 hits |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Before Fix | 14.027s | 5.726s | 3.183s | 3.139s |
| After Fix | 1.216s | 3.794s* | 1.330s | 1.301s |

### Cardinality 10k records
| Metric | 8,897 hits | 1,122 hits | 15 hits | 0 hits |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Before Fix | 1.386s | 3.232s* | 0.580s | 0.395s |
| After Fix | 0.756s | 3.410s* | 0.772s | 0.572s |


*Note: The increase in response time in the second column is caused by a different execution path taken (fuzzy search) which becomes the most significant path in terms of execution time once the other queries are optimized.

opw-6299343

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275306
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271306