I have a requirement for implementing following entities in a DynamoDB table
I have stored these entities in DynamoDB as below.
Partition Key : PROJ#ProjectId:CountryId
Sort Key : Project Name
Company : company data as JSON document
Since this is a one to many relationship, N number of projects of the same company will create N number of project records and same company details will be stored in their Company attribute. The reason for doing this is, the most critical data access point is via ProjectId and CountryId (Assume that I can't change this DB design)
I have a requirement to implement a search functionality which supports filter table using company name, address, project name, country etc (using a single filter or any combination of these filters). I'm using DynamoDB streams to feed elastic search cluster and update any creation, deleting or update of the details there and use elastic search API to query data.
But I need to index these data in following format, so that when I receive the details from elastic search, data will not be duplicated
{
"id" : 1
"name" : "ABC",
"description" : "description",
"address" : "address",
"projects" : [
{
"id" : 10,
"name" : "project 1",
"countryId" : 10
},
{
"id" : 20,
"name" : "project 1",
"countryId" : 10
}
]
}
At the record creation time, since Project records are creating as single records, is there any recommended or standard way that I can grab all the Project records of Company and create the above json document and index it in elastic search?
This is how I would approach it :
In elastic the document id will be the companyID
What you can do is create a lambda that is triggered based on the change streams and use elastic's update by query to query for the document and PAINLESS scripting to update the project section of the document, this will work for less frequent changes.
Related
I am dumping data in to ElasticSearch from a json file which is exported from mongodb. I am facing an issue where my data from json with array fields converted into a string.
"_source" : {
"CITIES" : [
"ABC"
],
"CITY_AREAS" : """["COLONY (AIT)"]""",
"INTERESTS" : [
"CARS"
]}
I am not doing any mapping and I know the elastic is using its default mapping on the basis of very first document which got inserted in ES.
I want to find a solution where I run the update command to update the fields with array type for all the documents containing "CITY_AREAS"
E.G :
"CITY_AREAS" : ["COLONY (AIT)"]
P.S : Some documents are having "CITY _AREAS" key and some don;t have.
you will need to reindex for this, so that it uses the correct mapping type. an update will not work
I am working on an E-Commerce application. Catalog Data is being served by Elastic Search.
I have document's for Product which is already indexed in Elastic Search.
Document Looks something like this (Excluded few fields for the purpose of better readability):
{
"title" : "Product Name",
"volume" : "200gm",
"brand" : {
"brand_code" : XXXX,
"brand_name" : "Brand Name"
},
"#timestamp" : "2021-08-26T08:08:11.319Z",
"store" : [
{
"physical_unit" : 0,
"default_price" : 115.0,
"_id" : "1234_111",
"product_code" : "1234",
"warehouse_code" : 111,
"available_unit" : 100
}
],
"category" : {
"category_code" : 987,
"category_name" : "CategoryName",
"category_url_link" : "CategoryName",
"super_category_name" : "SuperCategoryName",
"parent_category_name" : "ParentCategoryName"
}
}
store object in the above document is the one where ES Query will look for price and to decide if item is in stock or Out Of Stock.
I would like to add more child objects to store (Basically data from multiple inventory). This can go up to more than 150 child objects for each product.
Eventually, A product document will look something like this with multiple inventory's data mapped to a particular document.
{
"title" : "Product Name",
"volume" : "200gm",
"brand" : {
"brand_code" : XXXX,
"brand_name" : "Brand Name"
},
"#timestamp" : "2021-08-26T08:08:11.319Z",
"store" : [
{
"physical_unit" : 0,
"default_price" : 115.0,
"_id" : "1234_111",
"product_code" : "1234",
"warehouse_code" : 111,
"available_unit" : 100
},
{
"physical_unit" : 0,
"default_price" : 125.0,
"_id" : "1234_112",
"product_code" : "1234",
"warehouse_code" : 112,
"available_unit" : 100
},
{
"physical_unit" : 0,
"default_price" : 105.0,
"_id" : "1234_113",
"product_code" : "1234",
"warehouse_code" : 113,
"available_unit" : 100
}
Upto N no of stores
],
"category" : {
"category_code" : 987,
"category_name" : "CategoryName",
"category_url_link" : "CategoryName",
"super_category_name" : "SuperCategoryName",
"parent_category_name" : "ParentCategoryName"
}
}
Functional Requirement :
For any product, we should show lowest price across all warehouse.
For EX: If a particular product has 50 store mapped to it, Elastic Search query should look into the nested object and get the value which is lowest in all 50 stores if item is available.
Performance should not be degraded.
Challenges :
If we start storing those many stores for each product, data will go considerably high. Will that be a problem ?
What would be the efficient way to extract the lowest price from nested document?
How would facets work within nested document ? Like if i apply price range filter ES picks up the data which was not showed earlier. (It might pick the data from other store which matches the range)
We are using template to query ES and the Version of the Elastic Search is 6.0.
Thanks in Advance!!
First there are improvements to nested document search in version 7.x that are worth the upgrade.
As for version 6.x, there are a lot of factors there that I could not give you a concrete answer. It also seems you may not be understanding the way that nested documents work, they are not relational.
In particular when you say that each product might have 50 stores mapped to it that sounds like you are implying a relationship, which will not exist with a nested document. However, the values from those 50 stores would be stored within an index nested under the parent document. Having 50 stores under a product or category does not sound concerning.
ElasticSearch has not really talked in terms of facets since the introduction of the aggregation framework. Its not that they dont exist, just not how they are discussed.
So lets try this. ElasticSearch optimizes its search and query through a divide and conquer mechanism. The data is spread across several shards, a configurable number, and each shard is responsible for reviewing its own data. Further, those shards can be distributed across many machines so that there are many cpus and lots of memory for the search. So growing the data doesn't matter if you are willing to grow the cluster, as it is possible to maintain a situation where each machine is doing the same amount of work as it was doing before.
Unlike a relational database, filters search terms allow Elastic to drastically reduce the data that it is looking at and a larger number of filters will improve performance where on a relational database performance declines.
Now back to nested documents. They are stored as a separate index, but instead of mapping the results to the nested doc, the results map to the parent doc id. So you're nested docs arent exactly in the same index as the rest of the document, though they are not truly separate either. But that does mean that the nested documents should have minimal impact the performance of the queries against the parent documents. But if your data size grows beyond the capacity of your current system you will still need to increase its size.
As to how you would query, you would use Elastic aggregations. These will allow you to calculate your "facet" counts and identify the best prices. The Elastic aggregations are very powerful and very fast. There are caveats that are well documented, but in general they will work as you expect.
In version 6.x query string queries cannot access the search criteria in a nested document, and a complex query must be used.
To recap
Functional Requirement :
For any product, we should show lowest price across all warehouse.
For EX: If a particular product has 50 store mapped to it,
ElasticSearch query should look into the nested object and get the
value which is lowest in all 50 stores if item is available.
Yes a nested aggregation will do this.
Performance should not be degraded.
Performance will continue to depend on the ratio of the size of the data to the overall cluster size.
Challenges :
If we start storing those many stores for each product, data will go considerably high. Will that be a problem ?
No this should not be a problem
What would be the efficient way to extract the lowest price from nested document?
Elastic Aggregations
How would facets work within nested document ? Like if i apply price range filter ES picks up the data which was not showed earlier. (It might pick the data from other store which matches the range)
Yes filtering can work with Aggregations very well. The aggregation will be based on the filtered data. In fact you could have an aggregation based on just minimum price, and in the same query then have an aggregation using your price ranges, which will give you the count of documents that have a store within that price range, and you could have a sub aggregation showing the stores under each price range.
We are using template to query ES and the Version of the Elastic Search is 6.0. Thanks in Advance!!
I know nothing about template. The ElasticSearch API is so dead simple I do not know why anyone uses additional tools on top of the API, they just add weight, and increase complexity and make key features not available because the wrapper author did not pass through the feature.
I have the location(geo points) data updated every 5 minutes for millions of users. We have to search users with specific attributes(age/interests/languages) & in particular geo range. Wanted to understand the right strategy to store such data in Elastic.
Option1
Create user document with following keys
user Metadata & attributes (age, interests, languages, salary etc around 8-10 searchable attributes)
Live location (changing every few minutes)
"liveLocation" : {
"type" : "Point",
"coordinates" : [-72.333077, 30.856567]
}
location data - multiple addresses - home address, work address etc along with geo points. (not updated frequently) -
"addresses" :
[
{
"type" : "home",
"address" : "first floor, xyz, near landmark",
"city" : "Newyork",
"country" : "Country",
"zipcode" : "US1029",
"location" : {
"type" : "Point",
"coordinates" : [-73.856077, 40.848447]
},
{
... more atype of addresses
}
]
We want to perform geo search queries over all the geo type fields. My worry - live location for users will be updated quite frequently. Is this a viable approach ?
Option2
Treat every location update as a time series data and insert a new document. This will avoid updating the documents. instead will insert new documents for each user every few minutes.
Problems -
While searching all the users(home/office/live location) in a particular geo range, I have to consider only the last updated documents for each user . How to do that in elastic ?
We have to search users with specific attributes(age/interests/language) & in particular geo range. If option2 is preferable should user attribute-metadata & location updates be treated as parent-child relationship or some other approach?
In Conclusion - What should be the right approach .
Background
I migrating my ES index into ES version 6. I currenly stuck because ES6 removed the using on "_type" field.
Old Implementation (ES2)
My software has many users (>100K). Each user has at least one document in ES. So, the hierarchy looks like this:
INDEX -> TYPE -> Document
myindex-> user-123 -> document-1
The key point here is with this structure I can easily remove all the document of specific user.
DELETE /myindex/user-123
(Delete all the document of specific user, with a single command)
The problem
"_type" is no longer supported by ES6.
Possible solution
Instead of using _type, use the index name as USER-ID. So my index will looks like:
"user-123" -> "static-name" -> document
Delete user is done by delete index (instead of delete type in previous implementation).
Questions:
My first worry is about the amount of index and performance: Having like 1M indexes is something that acceptable in terms of performance? don't forget I have to search on them frequently.
Most of my users has small amount of documents stored in ES. Is that make sense to hold a shard, which should be expensive, for < 10 documents?
My data architecture sounds reasonable for you?
Any other tip will be welcome!
Thanks.
I would not have one index per user, it's a waste of resources, especially if there are only 10 docs per user.
What I would do instead is to use filtered aliases, one per user.
So the index would be named users and the type would be a static name, e.g. doc. For user 123, the documents of that user would all be stored in users/doc/xyz and in each document you need to add the user id, e.g.
PUT users/doc/xyz
{
...
"userId": 123,
...
}
Then you can define a filtered alias for all documents of user 123, like this:
POST /_aliases
{
"actions" : [
{
"add" : {
"index" : "users",
"alias" : "user-123",
"filter" : { "term" : { "userId" : "123" } }
}
}
]
}
If you need to delete all documents of user 123, then you can simply do it like this:
POST user-123/_delete_by_query?q=*
Having these many indexes is definitely not a good approach. If your only concern to delete multiple documents with a single command. Then you can use Delete by Query API provided by ElasticSearch
You can introduce "subtype" attribute in all your document containing value for each document like "user-" value. So in your case, document would looks like.
{
"attribute1":"value",
"subtype":"user-123"
}
I am looking for a way to search in more than one index at the same time using Elastica.
I have an index products, and an index user.
products contains {product_id, product_name, price} and user contains {product_id, user_name, date}. Knowing that the product_id in both of them is the same, in products each products_id is unique but in user they're not as a user can buy the same product multiple times.
Anyway, I want to automatically get the price of a product from the products index while searching through the user index.
I know that we can search over multiple indexes like so (correct me if I'm wrong) :
$search = new \Elastica\Search($client);
$search->addIndex('users')
->addType('user')
->addIndex('products')
->addType('product');
But the problem is, when I write an aggregation on the products_id for example and then create a new query with some filters :
$products_agg = new \Elastica\Aggregation\Terms('products_id');
$products_agg->setField('products_id')->setSize(0);
$query = new \Elastica\Query();
$query->addAggregation($products_agg);
$query->setQuery($bool);
$search->setQuery($query);
How does elastica know in which index to search? How can I link this products_id to the other index?
The Elastica library has support for Multi Search API, The multi search API allows to execute several search requests within the same API. The endpoint for it is _msearch.
The format of the requests is similar to the bulk API, The first line
is header part that includes which index / indices to search on, The second line includes the typical search body requests.
{"index" : "products", "type": "products"}
{"query" : {"match_all" : {}}, "from" : 0, "size" : 10} // write your own query to get price
{"index" : "uesrs", "type" : "user"}
{"query" : {"match_all" : {}}} // query for user
Check test case in Multi/SearchTest.php to see how to use.
Basically you want to join two indexes based on a common field as in sql.
What you can do is model you data in the same index using join datatype
https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/master/parent-join.html
Index all documents in the same index ,
Make all product documents - parent.
Make all user documents as child
And the use parent-child aggregations and queries
https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/master/parent-join.html#_parent_join_queries_and_aggregations
NOTE: make sure of the performance implication of parent-child mapping
https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/master/parent-join.html#_parent_join_and_performance
One more thing you can do is put all the information of the product with every user that buys it.
But this can unnecessarily waste you space and is not a good practice as per data rules are concerned.
But since this is a search engine and elasticsearch suggests that best is to normalise and duplicate data rather that using parent-child.
you can try the following:
1- naming indexes with specific name like the following
myFirstIndex-myProjectName
mySecIndex-myProjectName
myThirdIndex-myProjectName
and so on.
2- that's give me the ability using * in the field of indexes to search because it accepts wildcard so i can search across multiple fields like this using kibana Dev Tools
GET *-myProjectName/_search
{
"_source": {
"excludes": [ "*" ]
},
"query": { "match_all": {} },
}
this will search on each index includes -myProjectName.
You can't query two indices with different mappings. Best way to solve your problem is to just do two queries (application-side joins). First query you do the aggregations on the user and the second you get the prices.
Another option would be to add the price to the user index. Sometimes you have to sacrifice a little space for better usability.