I was able to identify which field matched via explain, but couldn't see any information on which token filter was the reason for the match. I've tried specifying the analyzer name that the field uses as well as not specifying. If the explain is supposed to provide this data, I will give it another go and set up a test index with simpler analyzer setups.
Also, in order to do this, I will need to run the explain separate from the search itself. My ultimate goal is to be able to do this within milliseconds (less than 10). Is this feasible with explain? On Wednesday, January 14, 2015 at 12:51:15 PM UTC-8, Nikolas Everett wrote: > > What about explain? > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Ed Kim <edk...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > >> Just a friendly bump to see if anyone has any feedback. :) >> >> >> On Saturday, January 10, 2015 at 10:38:34 PM UTC-8, Ed Kim wrote: >>> >>> Hello all, I was wondering if anyone could offer some feedback on >>> whether there is a way to determine how a document matched in real time. I >>> currently use custom analyzers at index time to allow a broad array of >>> matches for a given text field. I try to match based on phrases, synonyms, >>> substrings, stemming, etc of a given phrase, and I would like to be able to >>> figure out at search time, which analyzer was attributed to causing the >>> match. >>> >>> Currently, I've gotten around this by creating child documents where the >>> fields are fanned out to their respective analyzer types. So I have a child >>> document where the field only applies stemming, another that uses only >>> synonyms, etc. However, due to the growing number of fields that require >>> analysis and the growth of my data set, I'd much prefer if I had less >>> documents (and less complex too). I was hoping there would be a way to tag >>> tokens at the analysis phase that could be used at the search phase to >>> quickly determine my match level, but I was not able to find anything like >>> this. >>> >>> Having said that, has anyone else ever tried to figure this out, or have >>> an thoughts on how to leverage ES at a lower level to determine match? >>> >> -- >> 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 elasticsearc...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/eab16b7d-7d98-4096-b853-66ef65376c44%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/eab16b7d-7d98-4096-b853-66ef65376c44%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- 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/326aca97-d937-41cc-9c28-7f89aa398c81%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
