I've strugged to figure this one out. I have records with time and GPS as such:
{ID: 1,Time:"2017-01-1",gps:{lat:38.00,lon:-79.00}},
{ID: 2,Time:"2017-01-1",gps:{lat:38.00,lon:-79.00}},
{ID: 1,Time:"2017-01-2",gps:{lat:39.00,lon:-77.00}},
{ID: 2,Time:"2017-01-2",gps:{lat:20.00,lon:-20.00}},
{ID: 1,Time:"2017-01-3",gps:{lat:20.00,lon:-20.00}},
{ID: 3,Time:"2017-01-1",gps:{lat:20.00,lon:-20.00}},
..........
I have a map that allows drawing circles and selecting regions. Currently, I can easily query and aggregate the records that have appeared in ANY of the locations selected. This is an example:
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"should": [
{
"geo_distance": {
"distance": 56100.0,
"gps": {
"lat": 38,
"lon": -79
}
}
},
{
"geo_distance": {
"distance": 56100.0,
"gps": {
"lat": 39,
"lon": -77
}
}
}
]
}
},
"aggs": {
"by_record_id":{
"terms": {
"field": "id"
}
}
}
}
However, I'm a bit baffled on HOW get the intersection of the selections. (NOTE: the circles are not overlapped). Essentially, I want an aggregate of the records that have had gps values that have appeared in both of the circles and remove any that have only appeared in one or none. For example, with the above records, I would only want an aggregation results for ID=1 (as ID=2 and ID=3 don't appear in both circles).
If I change the query to {"query":{"bool":{"must":[...]}}}, I get no results. Because, obviously, no record appears in 2 locations at the same time.
I've tried many different things with queries including function_score (putting each location in functions) and utilizing the scores (based on different score types). In addition, I've tried many different aggregate combinations including filtering with top_hits, cardinality (with precision_threshold), bucket_selector with cardinality.
This seems super easy and obvious in SQL. Please help an elasticsearch nube.
Got the answer!
"aggs": {
"ids": {
"terms": {
"field": "ID"
},
"aggs": {
"the_filter": {
"bucket_selector": {
"buckets_path": {
"the_doc_count": "_count"
},
"script": "params.the_doc_count >= 2"
}
}
}
}
}
Related
We are currently using ElasticSearch 6.7 and have a huge amount of data making some request taking too much time.
To avoid this problem, we want to set up pagination within our research towards elasticsearch. The problem is that I can't put one of the pagination methods proposed by ES on the different requests that already exist.
For example, this request contains different aggregations and a query:
https://github.com/trackit/trackit/blob/master/usageReports/lambda/es_request_constructor.go#L61-L75
In addition, the results are sorted after the information is collected.
I tried to set up the Search After method as well as a form of pagination using from & size.
Scroll doesn't works with aggregations and composite aggregation doesn't accept query.
So, there is any good way to do pagination in ElasticSearch combined with other request type and how to do it with the example above?
composite aggregation doesn't accept query
It does accept query. In the example below, the results are filtered based on play_name. The aggregation only get applied to the result of the query and it can be paginated using the after option.
{
"query": {
"term": {
"play_name": "A Winters Tale"
}
},
"size": 0,
"aggs": {
"speaker": {
"composite": {
"after": {
"product": "FLORIZEL"
},
"sources": [
{
"product": {
"terms": {
"field": "speaker"
}
}
}
]
},
"aggs": {
"speech_number": {
"terms": {
"field": "speech_number"
},
"aggs": {
"line_id": {
"terms": {
"field": "line_id"
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
For reference, I'm using Elasticsearch 6.4.0
I have a Elasticsearch query that returns a certain number of hits, and I'm trying to remove hits with text field values that are too similar. My query is:
{
"size": 10,
"collapse": {
"field": "author_id"
},
"query": {
"function_score": {
"boost_mode": "replace",
"score_mode": "avg",
"functions": [
{
//my custom query function
}
],
"query": {
"bool": {
"must_not": [
{
"term": {
"author_id": MY_ID
}
}
]
}
}
}
},
"aggs": {
"book_name_sample": {
"sampler": {
"shard_size": 10
},
"aggs": {
"frequent_words": {
"significant_text": {
"field": "book_name",
"filter_duplicate_text": true
}
}
}
}
}
}
This query uses a custom function score combined with a filter to return books a person might like (that they haven't authored). Thing is, for some people, it returns books with names that are very similar (i.e. The Life of George Washington, Good Times with George Washington, Who was George Washington), and I'd like the hits to have a more diverse set of names.
I'm using a bucket_selector to aggregate the hits based on text similarity, and the query gives me something like:
...,
"aggregations": {
"book_name_sample": {
"doc_count": 10,
"frequent_words": {
"doc_count": 10,
"bg_count": 482626,
"buckets": [
{
"key": "George",
"doc_count": 3,
"score": 17.278715785140975,
"bg_count": 9718
},
{
"key": "Washington",
"doc_count": 3,
"score": 15.312204414323656,
"bg_count": 10919
}
]
}
}
}
Is it possible to filter the returned documents based on this aggregation result within Elasticsearch? IE remove hits with book_name_sample doc_count less than X? I know I can do this in PHP or whatever language uses the hits, but I'd like to keep it within ES. I've tried using a bucket_selector aggregator like so:
"book_name_bucket_filter": {
"bucket_selector": {
"buckets_path": {
"freqWords": "frequent_words"
},
"script": "params.freqWords < 3"
}
}
But then I get an error: org.elasticsearch.search.aggregations.bucket.sampler.InternalSampler cannot be cast to org.elasticsearch.search.aggregations.InternalMultiBucketAggregation
Also, if that filter removes enough documents so that the hit count is less than the requested size, is it possible to tell ES to go fetch the next top scoring hits so that hits count is filled out?
Why not use top hits inside the aggregation to get relevant document that match the bucket? You can specify how many relevant top hits you want inside the top hits aggregation. So basically this will give you a certain number of documents for each bucket.
Consider the following query for Elasticsearch 5.6:
{
"size": 0,
"query": {
"match_all": {}
},
"rescore": [
{
"window_size": 10000,
"query": {
"rescore_query": {
"function_score": {
"boost_mode": "replace",
"script_score": {
"script": {
"source": "doc['topic_score'].value"
}
}
}
},
"query_weight": 0,
"rescore_query_weight": 1
}
}
],
"aggs": {
"distinct": {
"terms": {
"field": "identical_id",
"order": {
"top_score": "desc"
}
},
"aggs": {
"best_unique_result": {
"top_hits": {
"size": 1
}
},
"top_score": {
"max": {
"script": {
"inline": "_score"
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
This is a simplified version where the real query has a more complex main query and the rescore function is far more intensive.
Let me explain it's purpose first incase I'm about to spend a 1000 hours developing a pen that writes in space when a pencil would actually solve my problem. I'm performing a fast initial query, then rescoring the top results with a much more intensive function. From those results I want to show the top distinct values, i.e. no two results should have the same identical_id. If there's a better way to do this I'd also consider that an answer.
I expected a query like this would order results by the rescore query, group all the results that had the same identical_id and display the top hit for each such distinct group. I also assumed that since I'm ordering those term aggregation buckets by the max parent _score, they would be ordered to reflect the best result they contain as determined from the original rescore query.
The reality is that the term buckets are ordered by the maximum query score and not the rescore query score. Strangely the top hits within the buckets do seem to use the rescore.
Is there a better way to achieve the end result that I want, or some way I can fix this query to work the way I expect it too?
From documentation :
The query rescorer executes a second query only on the Top-K results returned by the query and post_filter phases. The number of docs which will be examined on each shard can be controlled by the window_size parameter, which defaults to 10.
As the rescore query kicks in after the post_filter phase, I assume the term aggregation buckets are already fixed.
I have no idea on how you can combine rescore and aggregations. Sorry :(
I think I have a pretty great solution to this problem, but I'll let the bounty continue to expiration incase someone comes up with a better approach.
{
"size": 0,
"query": {
"match_all": {}
},
"aggs": {
"sample": {
"sampler": {
"shard_size": 10000
},
"aggs": {
"distinct": {
"terms": {
"field": "identical_id",
"order": {
"top_score": "desc"
}
},
"aggs": {
"best_unique_result": {
"top_hits": {
"size": 1,
"sort": [
{
"_script": {
"type": "number",
"script": {
"source": "doc['topic_score'].value"
},
"order": "desc"
}
}
]
}
},
"top_score": {
"max": {
"script": {
"source": "doc['topic_score'].value"
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
The sampler aggregation will take the top N hits per shard from the core query and run aggregations over those. Then in the max aggregator that defines the bucket order I use the exact same script as the one I use to pick a top hit from the bucket. Now the buckets and the top hits are running over the same top N sets of items and the buckets will order by the max of the same score, generated from the same script. Unfortunately I still need run the script once to order the buckets and once to pick a top hit within the bucket, and you could use the rescore instead for the top hits ordering, but either way it has to run twice and I found it was faster as a sort script then as a rescore
The Data
So I have reams of different types of time series data. Currently i've chosen to put each type of data into their own index because with the exception of 4 fields, all of the data is very different. Also the data is sampled at different rates and are not guaranteed to have common timestamps across the same sub-second window so fusing them all into one large document is also not a trivial task.
The Goal
One of our common use cases that i'm trying to see if I can solve entirely in Elasticsearch is to return an aggregation result of one index based on the time windows returned from a query of another index. Pictorially:
This is what I want to accomplish.
Some Considerations
For small enough signal transitions on the "condition" data, I can just use a date histogram and some combination of a top hits sub aggregation, but this quickly breaks down when I have 10,000's or 100,000's of occurrences of "the condition". Further this is just one "case", I have 100's of sets of similar situations that i'd like to get the overall min/max from.
The comparisons are basically amongst what I would consider to be sibling level documents or indices, so there doesn't seem to be any obvious parent->child relationship that would be flexible enough over the long run, at least with how the data is currently structured.
It feels like there should be an elegant solution instead of brute force building the date ranges outside of Elasticsearch with the results of one query and feeding 100's of time ranges into another query.
Looking through the documentation it feels like some combination of Elasticsearch scripting and some of the pipelined aggregations are going to be what i want, but no definitive solutions are jumping out at me. I could really use some pointers in the right direction from the community.
Thanks.
I found a "solution" that worked for me for this problem. No answers or even comments from anyone yet, but i'll post my solution in case someone else comes along looking for something like this. I'm sure there is a lot of opportunity for improvement and optimization and if I discover such a solution (likely through a scripted aggregation) i'll come back and update my solution.
It may not be the optimal solution but it works for me. The key was to leverage the top_hits, serial_diff and bucket_selector aggregators.
The "solution"
def time_edges(index, must_terms=[], should_terms=[], filter_terms=[], data_sample_accuracy_window=200):
"""
Find the affected flights and date ranges where a specific set of terms occurs in a particular ES index.
index: the Elasticsearch index to search
terms: a list of dictionaries of form { "term": { "<termname>": <value>}}
"""
query = {
"size": 0,
"timeout": "5s",
"query": {
"constant_score": {
"filter": {
"bool": {
"must": must_terms,
"should": should_terms,
"filter": filter_terms
}
}
}
},
"aggs": {
"by_flight_id": {
"terms": {"field": "flight_id", "size": 1000},
"aggs": {
"last": {
"top_hits": {
"sort": [{"#timestamp": {"order": "desc"}}],
"size": 1,
"script_fields": {
"timestamp": {
"script": "doc['#timestamp'].value"
}
}
}
},
"first": {
"top_hits": {
"sort": [{"#timestamp": {"order": "asc"}}],
"size": 1,
"script_fields": {
"timestamp": {
"script": "doc['#timestamp'].value"
}
}
}
},
"time_edges": {
"histogram": {
"min_doc_count": 1,
"interval": 1,
"script": {
"inline": "doc['#timestamp'].value",
"lang": "painless",
}
},
"aggs": {
"timestamps": {
"max": {"field": "#timestamp"}
},
"timestamp_diff": {
"serial_diff": {
"buckets_path": "timestamps",
"lag": 1
}
},
"time_delta_filter": {
"bucket_selector": {
"buckets_path": {
"timestampDiff": "timestamp_diff"
},
"script": "if (params != null && params.timestampDiff != null) { params.timestampDiff > " + str(data_sample_accuracy_window) + "} else { false }"
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
return es.search(index=index, body=query)
Breaking things down
Get filter the results by 'Index 2'
"query": {
"constant_score": {
"filter": {
"bool": {
"must": must_terms,
"should": should_terms,
"filter": filter_terms
}
}
}
},
must_terms is the required value to be able to get all the results for "the condition" stored in "Index 2".
For example, to limit results to only the last 10 days and when condition is the value 10 or 12 we add the following must_terms
must_terms = [
{
"range": {
"#timestamp": {
"gte": "now-10d",
"lte": "now"
}
}
},
{
"terms": {"condition": [10, 12]}
}
]
This returns a reduced set of documents that we can then pass on into our aggregations to figure out where our "samples" are.
Aggregations
For my use case we have the notion of "flights" for our aircraft, so I wanted to group the returned results by their id and then "break up" all the occurences into buckets.
"aggs": {
"by_flight_id": {
"terms": {"field": "flight_id", "size": 1000},
...
}
}
}
You can get the rising edge of the first occurence and the falling edge of the last occurence using the top_hits aggregation
"last": {
"top_hits": {
"sort": [{"#timestamp": {"order": "desc"}}],
"size": 1,
"script_fields": {
"timestamp": {
"script": "doc['#timestamp'].value"
}
}
}
},
"first": {
"top_hits": {
"sort": [{"#timestamp": {"order": "asc"}}],
"size": 1,
"script_fields": {
"timestamp": {
"script": "doc['#timestamp'].value"
}
}
}
},
You can get the samples in between using a histogram on a timestamp. This breaks up your returned results into buckets for every unique timestamp. This is a costly aggregation, but worth it. Using the inline script allows us to use the timestamp value for the bucket name.
"time_edges": {
"histogram": {
"min_doc_count": 1,
"interval": 1,
"script": {
"inline": "doc['#timestamp'].value",
"lang": "painless",
}
},
...
}
By default the histogram aggregation returns a set of buckets with the document count for each bucket, but we need a value. This is what is required for serial_diff aggregation to work, so we have to do a token max aggregation on the results to get a value returned.
"aggs": {
"timestamps": {
"max": {"field": "#timestamp"}
},
"timestamp_diff": {
"serial_diff": {
"buckets_path": "timestamps",
"lag": 1
}
},
...
}
We use the results of the serial_diff to determine whether or not two bucket are approximately adjacent. We then discard samples that are adjacent to eachother and create a combined time range for our condition by using the bucket_selector aggregation. This will throw out buckets that are smaller than our data_sample_accuracy_window. This value is dependent on your dataset.
"aggs": {
...
"time_delta_filter": {
"bucket_selector": {
"buckets_path": {
"timestampDiff": "timestamp_diff"
},
"script": "if (params != null && params.timestampDiff != null) { params.timestampDiff > " + str(data_sample_accuracy_window) + "} else { false }"
}
}
}
The serial_diff results are also critical for us to determine how long our condition was set. The timestamps of our buckets end up representing the "rising" edge of our condition signal so the falling edge is unknown without some post-processing. We use the timestampDiff value to figure out where the falling edge is.
right now I have a query like this:
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"must": [
{
"match": {
"uuid": "xxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx"
}
},
{
"range": {
"date": {
"from": "now-12h",
"to": "now"
}
}
}
]
}
},
"aggs": {
"query": {
"terms": [
{
"field": "query",
"size": 3
}
]
}
}
}
The aggregation works perfectly well, but I can't seem to find a way to control the hit data that is returned, I can use the size parameter at the top of the dsl, but the hits that are returned are not returned in the same order as the bucket so the bucket results do not line up with the hit results. Is there any way to correct this or do I have to issue 2 separate queries?
To expand on Filipe's answer, it seems like the top_hits aggregation is what you are looking for, e.g.
{
"query": {
... snip ...
},
"aggs": {
"query": {
"terms": {
"field": "query",
"size": 3
},
"aggs": {
"top": {
"top_hits": {
"size": 42
}
}
}
}
}
}
Your query uses exact matches (match and range) and binary logic (must, bool) and thus should probably be converted to use filters instead:
"filtered": {
"filter": {
"bool": {
"must": [
{
"term": {
"uuid": "xxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx"
}
},
{
"range": {
"date": {
"from": "now-12h",
"to": "now"
}
}
}
]
}
}
As for the aggregations,
The hits that are returned do not represent all the buckets that were returned. so if have buckets for terms 'a', 'b', and 'c' I want to have hits that represent those buckets as well
Perhaps you are looking to control the scope of the buckets? You can make an aggregation bucket global so that it will not be influenced by the query or filter.
Keep in mind that Elasticsearch will not "group" hits in any way -- it is always a flat list ordered according to score and additional sorting options.
Aggregations can be organized in a nested structure and return computed or extracted values, in a specific order. In the case of terms aggregation, it is in descending count (highest number of hits first). The hits section of the response is never influenced by your choice of aggregations. Similarly, you cannot find hits in the aggregation sections.
If your goal is to group documents by a certain field, yes, you will need to run multiple queries in the current Elasticsearch release.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think there's no way to do that in the current version of Elasticsearch (1.2.x). The good news is that there will be when version 1.3.x gets released:
http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/search-aggregations-metrics-top-hits-aggregation.html