I think sorting first, will be bad if u have more data. Sorting is not exaclty the fasted thinkg .. It may sound good for small amount of data, but what if we have 10 B documents ? Should ES go trought all documents just to sort them ?
I don't think this will be good. On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 12:45:43 PM UTC+1, David Pfeffer wrote: > > I have an index that contains 30 GB worth of news stories. I want to > return the stories that contain a particular name in their text, sorted > chronologically. I only want the first 100 stories. > > ElasticSearch seems to approach this problem by filtering every story to > just those that match, then sorting those results and returning the top > 100. This uses a reasonably large amount of resources to filter every > single one. > > Can I get ElasticSearch to instead sort first, and then filter in order > until it reaches the maximum (100). Granted that this would be 100 per > shard, but then the final step would be to take each shard's 100, sort them > all together, and take the top 100 of that result set. This should, at > least in my mind, use significantly less resources, as it would only need > to go through maybe 5000 or 10000 items to find a match, as opposed to the > entirety of the index. > > *(Cross-posted > from > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22467585/sort-before-filters-in-elasticsearch > > <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22467585/sort-before-filters-in-elasticsearch>, > > because I didn't get an answer there for 2 days.)* > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elasticsearch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/710176fc-2b8a-4046-b27a-7e25457f026c%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
