I've an issue with data in my Elastic index where certain string fields contain differing values that should be the same. For example X-Box, X Box and XBox.
I realise that I could add some transforms to my mappings, but it's not really appropriate in the case as we have data coming in from many sources and the values are unknown until we have received them.
Is it possible to define something like a transform but on search? For example, user searches 'XBox' but because we have defined it (after having discovered the variances) Elastic knows to also return documents for 'X-Box and XBox'?
Hope that makes sense? Thanks in advance.
Synonym filter is what you are looking for. It can map variants to a common name.
You can refer to this blog for creating analyzer.
Just use the format as shown below -
{
"filter" : {
"synonym" : {
"type" : "synonym",
"synonyms" : [
"X-box, x box => xbox",
"universe, cosmos"
]
}
}
}
Related
I have 2 indexes, one that stores data about an event and one that stores the availability of that event. I am trying to create a single query that gets events by a query but only returns ones that are available, and I am having difficulty doing so.
The events index stores
{
"id" : "152ce52d-e975-4ebd-849a-0a12f535e644",
"createdAt" : 1.5519999143126902E12,
"description" : "A very not so concise description",
"geoHash" : "dnh00x6x5",
"name" : "a name",
...etc...
}
The availability index stores availability like so:
{
"eventId" : "152ce52d-e975-4ebd-849a-0a12f535e644",
"maxGuests" : 8,
"availability" : {
"lte" : "2019-10-18T22:15:00.000Z",
"gte" : "2019-10-18T02:30:00.000Z"
}
}
I am trying to create a query like below, but what I can't figure out is how to filter by listings that meet the criteria in the events index AND are available in the availability index.
GET events,availability/_search
{
"size": 5,
"from": 0,
"_source": [
"id"
],
"query": {
"bool": {
"must": [
{
"geo_distance": {
"distance": "25mi",
"geoHash": {
"lat": 34.0389,
"lon": -84.3826
}
}
}
],
"should": [],
"filter":[
{
"range" : {
"availability" : {
"gte" : "2019-10-31",
"lte" : "2020-11-01",
"relation" : "within"
}
}
}
]
}
}
}
--
The reason I want to only do one query is that the client is expecting a certain specified number of events. If I filter out the unavailable events after I get the event data then I am likely to be left with fewer events than the client expected and would need to do yet another search to fill the gap.
Also, of course, I could merge the two indices so that the event also stores the availability info, but I originally set them up this way because the availability info may have hundreds or thousands of entries per event.
What you want to accomplish is an equivalent of a foreign key of SQL (join). There is no way to have exactly what you want, meaning to filter documents from index A by querying an index B. Your options are:
As you've mentioned solve it on application level (although this causes other problems for you, so it's not a solution).
Merge the data in one index and have duplicated event informatin. Although it seems expensive, the duplication of data in a NoSQL database is to be expected. If you need a relational model then maybe you should use a SQL solution.
Use parent/child (join datatype). The problem here is that you will need to have the data in the same index overall. Moreover, parent and child will be stored in the same shard as well.
One approach to this (a bit more complex though) that I believe would work for you is to use the nested datatype, which actually is a more compact approach for the solution number 2 (combine your data in one index, but save root information only once). Make events be at the root and availability appear as nested. When you want to add one availability you can use the update api, and when you query, you can search by the root fields and by the nested. If you need to retrieve specific availability entries for an event you can use inner hits
What you are trying to do (multi-index search) will not join your data automatically, it will not work. Elasticsearch doesn't work that way, and the relational model is not suited for this product.
One last thing, it's a good thing to plan ahead, but it's a bad thing to try to optimize early on.
The real problem is that programmers have spent far too much time worrying about efficiency in the wrong places and at the wrong times; premature optimization is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming.
An interesting read that summarizes the above
I am trying to use the metricbeat http module to monitor F5 pools.
I make a request to the f5 api and bring back json, which is saved to kibana. But the json contains an array of pool members and I want to count the number which are up.
The advice seems to be that this can be done with a scripted field. However, I can't get the script to retrieve the array. eg
doc['http.f5pools.items.monitor'].value.length()
returns in the preview results with the same 'Additional Field' added for comparison:
[
{
"_id": "rT7wdGsBXQSGm_pQoH6Y",
"http": {
"f5pools": {
"items": [
{
"monitor": "default"
},
{
"monitor": "default"
}
]
}
},
"pool.MemberCount": [
7
]
},
If I try
doc['http.f5pools.items']
Or similar I just get an error:
"reason": "No field found for [http.f5pools.items] in mapping with types []"
Googling suggests that the doc construct does not contain arrays?
Is it possible to make a scripted field which can access the set of values? ie is my code or the way I'm indexing the data wrong.
If not is there an alternative approach within metricbeats? I don't want to have to make a whole new api to do the calculation and add a separate field
-- update.
Weirdly it seems that the number values in the array do return the expected results. ie.
doc['http.f5pools.items.ratio']
returns
{
"_id": "BT6WdWsBXQSGm_pQBbCa",
"pool.MemberCount": [
1,
1
]
},
-- update 2
Ok, so if the strings in the field have different values then you get all the values. if they are the same you just get one. wtf?
I'm adding another answer instead of deleting my previous one which is not the actual question but still may be helpful for someone else in future.
I found a hint in the same documentation:
Doc values are a columnar field value store
Upon googling this further I found this Doc Value Intro which says that the doc values are essentially "uninverted index" useful for operations like sorting; my hypotheses is while sorting you essentially dont want same values repeated and hence the data structure they use removes those duplicates. That still did not answer as to why it works different for string than number. Numbers are preserved but strings are filters into unique.
This “uninverted” structure is often called a “column-store” in other
systems. Essentially, it stores all the values for a single field
together in a single column of data, which makes it very efficient for
operations like sorting.
In Elasticsearch, this column-store is known as doc values, and is
enabled by default. Doc values are created at index-time: when a field
is indexed, Elasticsearch adds the tokens to the inverted index for
search. But it also extracts the terms and adds them to the columnar
doc values.
Some more deep-dive into doc values revealed it a compression technique which actually de-deuplicates the values for efficient and memory-friendly operations.
Here's a NOTE given on the link above which answers the question:
You may be thinking "Well that’s great for numbers, but what about
strings?" Strings are encoded similarly, with the help of an ordinal
table. The strings are de-duplicated and sorted into a table, assigned
an ID, and then those ID’s are used as numeric doc values. Which means
strings enjoy many of the same compression benefits that numerics do.
The ordinal table itself has some compression tricks, such as using
fixed, variable or prefix-encoded strings.
Also, if you dont want this behavior then you can disable doc-values
OK, solved it.
https://discuss.elastic.co/t/problem-looping-through-array-in-each-doc-with-painless/90648
So as I discovered arrays are prefiltered to only return distinct values (except in the case of ints apparently?)
The solution is to use params._source instead of doc[]
The answer for why doc doesnt work
Quoting below:
Doc values are a columnar field value store, enabled by default on all
fields except for analyzed text fields.
Doc-values can only return "simple" field values like numbers, dates,
geo- points, terms, etc, or arrays of these values if the field is
multi-valued. It cannot return JSON objects
Also, important to add a null check as mentioned below:
Missing fields
The doc['field'] will throw an error if field is
missing from the mappings. In painless, a check can first be done with
doc.containsKey('field')* to guard accessing the doc map.
Unfortunately, there is no way to check for the existence of the field
in mappings in an expression script.
Also, here is why _source works
Quoting below:
The document _source, which is really just a special stored field, can
be accessed using the _source.field_name syntax. The _source is loaded
as a map-of-maps, so properties within object fields can be accessed
as, for example, _source.name.first.
.
Responding to your comment with an example:
The kyeword here is: It cannot return JSON objects. The field doc['http.f5pools.items'] is a JSON object
Try running below and see the mapping it creates:
PUT t5/doc/2
{
"items": [
{
"monitor": "default"
},
{
"monitor": "default"
}
]
}
GET t5/_mapping
{
"t5" : {
"mappings" : {
"doc" : {
"properties" : {
"items" : {
"properties" : {
"monitor" : { <-- monitor is a property of items property(Object)
"type" : "text",
"fields" : {
"keyword" : {
"type" : "keyword",
"ignore_above" : 256
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
i'm looking to add a feature to an existing query. Basically, I run a query that returns say 1000 documents. Those documents all have the same structure, only the values of certain fields vary. What i'd like, is to not only get the full list as a result, but also count how many results have a field X with the value Y, how many results have the same field X with the value Z etc...
Basically get all the results + 4 or 5 "counts" that would act like the SQL "group by", in a way.
The point of this is to allow full text search over all the clients in our database (without filtering), while showing how many of those are active clients, past clients, active prospects etc...
Any way to do this without running additional / separate queries ?
EDIT WITH ANSWER :
Aggregations is the way to go. Here's how I did it, it's so straightforward that I expected much harder work !
{
"query": {
"term": {
"_type":"client"
}
},
"aggregations" : {
"agg1" : {
"terms" : {
"field" : "listType.typeRef.keyword"
}
}
}
}
Note that it's even in a list of terms and not a single field, that's just how easy it was !
I believe what you are looking for is the aggregation query.
The documentation should be clear enough, but if you struggle please give us your ES query and we will help you from there.
I am using Elasticsearch to search for a group a user should join. I have the user data nested into the search query. On return I get back the closest matched group that user should be in.
The field I am searching on is a nested field as follows:
`{"interests": [
{"topics":["python", "stackoverflow", "elasticsearch"]},
{"topics":["arts", "textiles"]}
]}`
However if you want an understanding of a match - how do you do this?
Elasticsearch does have an explain function which says what the scoring is made up of using tfidf, but not specifically what terms were used.
For example, if I search for 'Textile', the doc should match on 'textiles'. Thus I want the term 'textiles' to be returned in explain or some other way.
The only way I see that provides this need, is to store the search and the document retrieved and then process both to discover words ES has most likely matched on.
EDIT - for some more clarity of the question
An example in my index of a group which has "interests": ['arts', 'fine arts', 'art painting', 'arts and crafts', 'sports']
Now my search, I am looking for Arts and many other things. Now the term I am searching for comes up in this list many times, thus should always be a contributor.
What I want in the response is to say these words were matched ['arts', 'fine arts', 'art painting', 'arts and crafts']along with the degree to which they match i..e 'arts' should be higher than the others, but all others are also relevant
Elasticsearch allows you to specify the _name field for all queries and
filters. This means that you can separate your query into different parts with
separate names, which will allow you to determine which parts matched.
For example:
{
"query" : {
"bool" : {
"should" : [
{"match" : { "interests.topics" : {"query" : "python", "_name" : "py-topic"} }},
{"match" : { "interests.topics" : {"query" : "arts", "_name" : "arts-topic"} }}
]
}
}
}
Then, in your response, you will get back any array of which queries (or
filters) matched and you can determine if the py-topic query and/or the
arts-topic query matched above.
Whenever I create a visualization, Kibana 4 asks me to select the index for doing the search. My project requires searching data that is present in multiple indexes and hence I am stuck. I wish to search two indexes for my data and then visualize them. Any help would be valuable.
Kibana can create Visualization from multiple indexes. But! indexes should have similar names, or alias names with similar names, for example, you can simply grab data from indexes: logstash-2015-01-01 and logstash-2015-01-02 using mask logstash-*.
But yes it would be handy if we could write something like index1,onother_index.
A solution that works in any case: create an alias in Elasticsearch for the indexes you want to query simultaneously and then use the alias as an index-pattern in Kibana.
In the plugin Marvel, through the Sense interface, you can create an alias for multiple indexes by doing this request :
POST _aliases
{
"actions" : [
{ "add" : { "index" : "test1", "alias" : "alias1" } },
{ "add" : { "index" : "test2", "alias" : "alias1" } }
]
}
Or using CURL:
curl -XPOST 'http://localhost:9200/_aliases' -d '
{
"actions" : [
{ "add" : { "index" : "test1", "alias" : "alias1" } },
{ "add" : { "index" : "test2", "alias" : "alias1" } }
]
}'
Then, you just need to add an index-pattern in Kibana for "alias1" and create your visualizations.
For more informations on aliases, see https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/indices-aliases.html
Thanks for all the help, But I figured out a way in which this could be done.
In Index Pattern of Kibana 4 create an index Pattern as _all. This index pattern contains all the indexes present in your elasticsearch. Hence when you create a new visualization simply select the _all index pattern there and all the data fields from all the indexes in your elasticsearch are accessible and you can easily use it to create visualizations.
If I understand what you are asking correctly, then it may depend on how you've named your indexes.
I can query multiple logstash indexes, by selecting my pattern 'logstash-*'. When you setup your indexes it gives you the option to specify a pattern.
(Settings => Indices => Index Pattern => Add New)
I hope that helps.
Two wildcards (i.e. *-*) works for me in Kibana 4.
I'm not sure i understand correctly, but I think your best option is to create that visualization on both indexes you want separately, and build a dashboard including both the visualizations.
Kibana can't display a single visualization with searches from two separate indexes.