Below is my setup. I am inserting a user in ElasticSearch and I am doing weighted fuzziness username searches. The problem is that the fuzziness could be... fuzzier? I show you what I mean, this code is my mapping:
{
"mappings": {
"properties": {
"user_id": {
"enabled": false
},
"username": {
"type": "text"
},
"d_likes": {
"type": "rank_feature"
}
}
}
}
And I am inserting 2 users:
user_id: random, username: pietje, d_likes: 3
user_id: random, username: p13tje, d_likes: 30
Now the problem is that I need to write a lot of characters in the username field to get hits. This is how I search:
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"must": [
{
"match": {
"username": {
"query": "piet",
"fuzziness": "auto"
}
}
}
],
"should": [
{
"rank_feature": {
"field": "d_likes"
}
}
]
}
}
}
'piet' gives no results. That looks strange to me, I was hoping I would actually see both p13tje and pietje (in that order) because they are so similar. When my search query is pietj, I only get pietje and not p13tje.
So I was wondering how can I get more hits with the fuzziness search? I want autocompletion for usernames, this is pretty bad user expierence, because it only gives autocompletion when you have filled in most the characters. I just want the search to be more loose and give more results.
ElasticSearch documentation:
When querying text or keyword fields, fuzziness is interpreted as a Levenshtein Edit Distance — the number of one character changes that need to be made to one string to make it the same as another string.
The Levenshtein Edit Distance essentially is a way of measuring the difference between 2 string values.
You've set the fuzziness parameter to AUTO, which is a great default decision. However, for some short strings like yours, it can prove to be not as fuzzy as you'd want it to be.
This is because ElasticSearch (ES) will generate an edit distance based on the length of the string, which will determine how many edits away the string in the index is from your search query.
You haven't specified any specific low or high values so for piet, as it's a 4 character string, only one edit will be allowed.
pietje is actually two edits away - piet needs a j as well as an e so it won't show up.
p13tje is actually four edits away - it needs a j, an e, a change from 1 to i & a change from 3 to e so it also won't show up.
The maximum allowed Levenshtein Edit Distance for ES fuzzy searching is 2 (larger differences are far more expensive to compute efficiently and are not processed by the Lucene search engine which ES is based on) so to fix this, set fuzziness to 2 manually.
"match": {
"username": {
"query": "piet",
"fuzziness": "2"
}
}
Hopefully, that will at least allow pietje to show up in the search and possibly even p13tje depending on if there are any other matches or not.
Instead of manually setting it to 2, you could also set the low and high distance arguments for AUTO however that will generate worse results (format is AUTO:[low],[high] e.g. AUTO:15,30).
For example, with a low of 8 and a high of 20:
Usernames with a character length of 8 or lower will not have any fuzzy searching as it will have to be an exact match
Usernames with a character length between 9 & 20 will only be allowed 1 edit
Usernames with a character length of 21 or higher will only be allowed 2 edit
You can try tweaking the low and high values if you'd like, but for the... fuzziest fuzziness, set the edit distance to the maximum allowed Levenshtein edit distance (2).
Related
I am using the below query :
GET customer/doc/_search?routing=123
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"filter": [
{
"term": {
"location": "Delhi"
}
}
],
"should": [
{
"match_phrase_prefix": {
"phone": {
"query": "650",
"max_expansions": 100
}
}
}
]
}
}
}
The problem is my search on phone isn't working anymore. It used to work fine when I had less data, now every shard has data for multiple locations. Search on phone now requires me to type in 6 or 7 characters at times. (There may be matching phone numbers that have different location but are on this shard)
This is due to max_expansions I am guessing. When I increase it to 500 it does return me search results (not all), but the query becomes slow.
Isn't there a way to force es to apply filter first (and restrict the dataset) and then apply the should clause, so that I get the matching results even with small value of max_expansions?
Any help is appreciated.
It is due to max_expansions. Restricting dataset is not exactly what you may want to do ( Thats also not very straight forward - you may have to use some script which will in turn slowdown query).
When you query for a wildcard expression, Lucene expands the wildcard expression into set of actual terms in your inverted index term dictionary. Now , when you restrict the term expansion to 500 - it might miss a few.
I would consider using prefixes during indexing phase. Prefixes helps to avoid the costly expansion in runtime phase.
I've been constructing an ElasticSearch query using Fuzzy Matching to match a user in the system. When running it against a specific group of users (ones with my name), the query appears to work perfectly, but when running it against a random selection of users, it appears to fail.
For the purposes of my testing, I'm passing in the exact values of a specific user, so I would expect at least 1 match.
In narrowing this down, I found that an exact match against a name returns the data as expected, but putting the same value into a fuzzy block causes it to return 0 results.
For Instance, this query returns a user record as expected:
{
"from": 0,
"size": 1,
"query": {
"bool": {
"must": [
{
"match": {
"firstName": {
"query": "sVxGBCkPYZ",
"boost": 30
}
}
}
],
"should": [
]
}
},
"fields": [
"id",
"firstName"
]
}
However replacing the match element with the below fails to return any records:
{
"fuzzy": {
"firstName": {
"value": "sVxGBCkPYZ",
"fuzziness": 2,
"boost": 30,
"min_similarity": 0.3
}
}
}
Why would this be happening, and is there anything I can do to remedy the situation?
For reference. This is the ES version i'm currently using:
"version": {
"number": "1.7.1",
"build_hash": "b88f43fc40b0bcd7f173a1f9ee2e97816de80b19",
"build_timestamp": "2015-07-29T09:54:16Z",
"build_snapshot": false,
"lucene_version": "4.10.4"
}
The match fails because fuzzy searches are term level queries meaning the query string would not be analysed while the data that got indexed, I assume, if of type text with standard analyzer, would be converted to svxgbckpyz in the inverted index.
You can instead, implement fuzziness with match query as below:
POST testindex/_search
{
"query":{
"match":{
"firstname":{
"query":"sVxGBCkPYZ",
"fuzziness":"AUTO"
}
}
}
}
You can change the value from AUTO to 2 or 3 depending on your use case.
The exact match you mentioned also works because query string would get analysed and converts the input string into lower case, which is available in inverted index.
As for how fuzzy query (that you've mentioned) works behind the scene, as per this LINK, is as follows:
The fuzzy query works by taking the original term and building a
Levenshtein automaton—like a big graph representing all the strings
that are within the specified edit distance of the original string.
The fuzzy query then uses the automaton to step efficiently through
all of the terms in the term dictionary to see if they match. Once it
has collected all of the matching terms that exist in the term
dictionary, it can compute the list of matching documents.
Of course, depending on the type of data stored in the index, a fuzzy
query with an edit distance of 2 can match a very large number of
terms and perform very badly.
Note this statement in particular, representing all the strings that are within the specified edit distance of the original string
For e.g. some of the words with distance of 1 for life would be aife, bife, cife, dife....lifz.
So in your case, fuzzy search's automaton would not be able to create term svxgbckpyz from input string sVxGBCkPYZ firstly because the distance between them is 7 (Remember distance is 1 between A and a) which I don't think AUTO option can create and even if you configure it to 7, it may not create the string as there would be huge list of words with distance 7
Adding one more LINK for more info. Hope it helps!
I am new to elastic search and I am confused between must and filter. I want to perform an and operation between my terms, so I did this
POST /xyz/_search
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"must": [
{
"term": {
"city": "city1"
}
},
{
"term": {
"saleType": "sale_type1"
}
}
]
}
}
}
which gave me the required results matching both the terms, and on using filter like this
POST /xyz/_search
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"must": [
{
"term": {
"city": "city1"
}
}
],
"filter": {
"term": {
"saleType": "sale_type1"
}
}
}
}
}
I get the same result, so when should I use must and when should I use filter? What is the difference?
must contributes to the score. In filter, the score of the query is ignored.
In both must and filter, the clause(query) must appear in matching documents. This is the reason for getting same results.
You may check this link
Score
The relevance score of each document is represented by a positive floating-point number called the _score. The higher the _score, the more relevant the document.
A query clause generates a _score for each document.
To know how score is calculated, refer this link
must returns a score for every matching document. This score helps you rank the matching documents, and compare the relative relevance between documents (using the magnitude of the score of each document).
With this, one can say, Doc 1 is how many times more relevant than Doc 2. Or that Doc 1 to 7 are of much higher relevancy than Doc 8+.
For how the relative score is determined, you can refer to the references below.
Briefly, it is related to the number of term occurrences in the document, the document length, and the average number of term occurrences in your database index.
filter doesn't return a score. All one can say is, all matching documents are of relevance. But it won't help in evaluating if one is more relevant than the other. You can think of filter as a must with only 2 scores: zero or non-zero, and where all zero-scored documents are dropped.
filter is helpful if you just want to whitelist/blacklist for e.g., all documents belonging to the topic "pets".
In summary, there are 3 points that will help you in deciding when to use what:
must is your only choice when comparing/ranking documents by relevance
filter excludes all documents that don't match
filter is a lot faster because Elasticsearch doesn't need to compute the relative score
References:
Query vs Filter: https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/query-filter-context.html
Computation of Relevance: https://www.infoq.com/articles/similarity-scoring-elasticsearch/
I have an ElasticSearch index with a list of "shops".
I'd like to allow customers to search these shops by both geo_distance (so, search for a point and get shops near that location), and textual match, like matches on shop name / address.
I'd like to get results that match either of these two criteria, and I'd like the order of these results to be a combination of both. The stronger the textual match, and the closer to the point searched, the higher the result. (Obviously, there's going to be a formula to combine these two, that'll need tweaking, not too worried about that part yet).
My issue / what I've tried:
geo_distance is a filter, not a query, so I can't combine both on the query part of the request.
I can use a bool => should filter (rather than query) that matches on either name or location. This gives me the results I want, but not in order.
I can also have _geo_distance as part of a sort clause so that documents closer to the point rank higher.
What I haven't figured out is how I would take the "regular" _score that ElasticSearch gives to documents when doing textual matches, and combine that with the geo_distance score.
By having the textual match in the filter, it doesn't seem to affect the score of documents (which makes sense). And I don't see how I could combine the textual match in the query part and a geo_distance filter so it's an OR rather than an AND.
I guess my best bet would be the equivalent of this:
{
function_score: {
query: { ... },
functions: [
{ geo_distance function },
{ multi_match_result score },
],
score_mode: 'multiply'
}
}
but I'm not sure you can do geo_distance as a score function, and I don't know how to have multi_match_result score as a score function, or if it's even possible.
Any pointers will be greatly appreciated.
I'm working with ElasticSearch v1.4, but I can upgrade if necessary.
but I'm not sure you can do geo_distance as a score function, and I don't know how to have multi_match_result score as a score function, or if it's even possible.
You can't really do it in the way that you're asking, but you can do what you want just as easily. For the simpler case, you get scoring just by using a normal query.
The problem with filters is that they're yes/no questions, so if you use them in a function_score, then it either boosts the score or it doesn't. What you probably want is degradation of the score as the distance from the origin grows. It's the yes/no nature that stops them from impacting the score at all. There's no improvement to relevancy implied by matching a filter -- it just means that it's part of the answer, but it doesn't make sense to say that it should be closer to the top/bottom as a result.
This is where the Decay function score helps. It works with numbers, dates, and -- most helpfully here -- geo_points. In addition to the types of data it accepts, it can decay using either gaussian, exponential, or linear decay functions. The one that you want to choose is honestly arbitrary and you should give the one that chooses the best "experience". I would suggest to start with gauss.
"function_score": {
"functions": [
"gauss": {
"my_geo_point_field": {
"origin": "0, 1",
"scale": "5km",
"offset": "500m",
"decay": 0.5
}
}
]
}
Note that origin is in x, y format (due to standard GeoJSON), which is longitude, latitude.
Each one of the values impacts how the score decays based on the graph (taken wholesale from the documentation). If you would use an offset of 0, then the score begins to drop once it's not exactly at the origin. With the offset, it allows it some buffer to be considered just as good.
The scale is directly associated with the decay in that the score will be chopped down by the decay value once it is scale-distance away from the origin (+/- the offset). In my above example, anything 5km from the origin would get half of the score as anything at the origin.
Again, just note that the different types of decay functions change the shape of scoring.
I'd like the order of these results to be a combination of both.
This is the purpose of the bool / should compound query. You get OR behavior with score improvement based on each match. Combining this with the above, you'd want something like:
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"should": [
{
"multi_match": { ... }
},
{
"function_score": {
"functions": [
"gauss": {
"my_geo_point_field": {
"origin": "0, 1",
"scale": "5km",
"offset": "500m",
"decay": 0.5
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
NOTE: If you add a must, then the should behavior changes from literal OR-like behavior (at least 1 must match) to completely optional behavior (none must match).
I'm working with ElasticSearch v1.4, but I can upgrade if necessary.
Starting with Elasticsearch 2.0, every filter is a query and every query is also a filter. The only difference is the context that it's used in. This doesn't change my answer here, but it's something that may help you in the future in addition to what I say next.
Geo-related performance increased dramatically in ES 2.2+. You should upgrade (and recreate your geo-related indices) to take advantage of those changes. ES 5.0 will have similar benefits!
I want to sort results, such that if one specific field (let's say 'first_name') is equal to an exact value (let's say 'Bob'), then those documents are returned first.
That would result in all documents where first_name is exactly 'Bob', would be returned first, and then all the other documents afterwards. Note that I don't intend to exclude documents where first_name is not 'Bob', merely sort them such that they're returned after all the Bobs.
I understand how numeric or alphabetical sorting works in Elasticsearch, but I can't find any part of the documentation covering this type of sorting.
Is this possible, and if so, how?
One solution is to manipulate the score of the results that contain the Bob in the first name field.
For example:
POST /test/users
{
"name": "Bob"
}
POST /test/users
{
"name": "Alice"
}
GET /test/users/_search
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"should": [
{
"match": {
"name": {
"query": "Bob",
"boost" : 2
}
}
},
{
"match_all": {}
}
]
}
}
}
Would return both Bob and Alice in that order (with approximate scores of 1 and 0.2 respectively).
From the book:
Query-time boosting is the main tool that you can use to tune
relevance. Any type of query accepts a boost parameter. Setting a
boost of 2 doesn’t simply double the final _score; the actual boost
value that is applied goes through normalization and some internal
optimization. However, it does imply that a clause with a boost of 2
is twice as important as a clause with a boost of 1.
Meaning that if you also wanted "Fred" to come ahead of Bob you could just boost it with a 3 factor in the example above.