You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The fact that terms aggregations don't give accurate counts is a bit deceptive. Without changing the way they are implemented, maybe we should make terms aggregations return an upper bound of the maximum error on the document count as part of the response? I think this would help make clear that there are potential accuracy issues, as well as make this inaccuracy easier to manage since there is a known upper bound on the error?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
…r the terms aggregation.
This is only applicable when the order is set to _count. The upper bound of the error in the doc count is calculated by summing the doc count of the last term on each shard which did not return the term. The implementation calculates the error by summing the doc count for the last term on each shard for which the term IS returned and then subtracts this value from the sum of the doc counts for the last term from ALL shards.
Closes#6696
The fact that terms aggregations don't give accurate counts is a bit deceptive. Without changing the way they are implemented, maybe we should make terms aggregations return an upper bound of the maximum error on the document count as part of the response? I think this would help make clear that there are potential accuracy issues, as well as make this inaccuracy easier to manage since there is a known upper bound on the error?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: