Hi,
I submit an issue few days ago about this
: https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/issues/6866.
Le jeudi 17 juillet 2014 14:44:29 UTC+2, Elliott Bradshaw a écrit :
I realize that this post is getting a little old, but does the community
have any feedback on the feasibility of
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
+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
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
I have the same issue, I would like to be able to do a fuzzy search for
some of my fields in a multi_match query of type cross_fields. Right now I
have to do two queries but gives me a disjunct set rather than a
conjunctive result:
{
query: {
bool: {
should: [
{
Any thoughts on this?
The search type is really fantastic and we're already using it in
production, but a fuzziness capability would add so much.
On Monday, April 7, 2014 9:59:54 AM UTC-4, Elliott Bradshaw wrote:
Hi Elasticsearch,
I've been playing with the new cross_fields multi match
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?
