I realize that this post is getting a little old, but does the community have any feedback on the feasibility of this?
On Friday, May 16, 2014 10:21:53 AM UTC-4, Tom wrote: > > +1 fuzziness would be great when using cross_fields > > Am Mittwoch, 7. Mai 2014 22:00:25 UTC+2 schrieb Ryan Tanner: >> >> Any update to this? >> >> On Monday, April 7, 2014 7:59:54 AM UTC-6, Elliott Bradshaw wrote: >>> >>> Hi Elasticsearch, >>> >>> I've been playing with the new cross_fields multi match type, and I've >>> got to say that I love it. It's a great way to search complex data without >>> doing a lot of memory killing denormalization. That said, is there any >>> plan to implement a fuzziness option with this type? That would certainly >>> be very valuable. >>> >>> - Elliott >>> >> -- 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/6170beb4-36d5-4323-93a1-14a612f601fa%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
