Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Docs: Facets deprecated #6485

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@jpountz
Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 12, 2014

Users are encouraged to move to the new aggregation framework that was
introduced in Elasticsearch 1.0.

Facets: deprecation.
Users are encouraged to move to the new aggregation framework that was
introduced in Elasticsearch 1.0.

Close #6485
@s1monw

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 12, 2014

LGTM

@jpountz jpountz added v2.0.0 labels Jun 12, 2014

@roytmana

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 12, 2014

Please do not deprecate facets until aggtegation supports _missing and _other buckets like facets do

@jpountz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jun 12, 2014

@roytmana there are a missing and a value_count aggregations that can be used to compute exactly the same thing as facets' _missing and _other.

@roytmana

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 13, 2014

@jpountz i am aware of them but it is not the same as explicitly supporting buckets of such kinds. The issue is really in the usability. When you have couple of levels of sub aggregations and forced repeating them on missing and other aggs on each level in addition to defining them in say terms agg plus you have few metrics aggs on all these levels it gets rather complicated to achieve the same results. When you consider that people often need to build generic frameworks or UIs around it, the need to translate concept of missing/other buckets into bloated config with missing/other aggs and then translate results back into consistent bucket structure becomes rather unpleasant experience. I did a similar thing (composite facets classes such as multi-filter facets or _other supports for stats which decomposed my extended facet onto several supported facets and then transformed results of multiple facets into unified bucket-like format) for facets but that was fairly easy because of single level nature of their aggregation. With aggregations it would be lot more headache to do. And performance will probably suffer for _other aggregation when done separately

For more discussion please see #5324 and #6273

Thank you,
Alex

@uboness

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 13, 2014

@roytmana we're well aware of your concerns. With that, on our side we're ready to deprecate facets as development on them stopped and all our efforts focus on aggs (to the point where at the moment we need to carry redundant constructs in the code base that we'd love to simply get rid of). Please note that we're talking about deprecation here, not an immediate removal. Hopefully by the time we remove them, the aggs will support the definition of default values for missing, which (as previously discussed) will serve as a viable alternative to the _missing functionality you're looking for... In any case, we don't see the verbosity of the API in the specific scenario you're dealing with as a viable reason to put the facets deprecation on hold

jpountz added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 13, 2014

Facets: deprecation.
Users are encouraged to move to the new aggregation framework that was
introduced in Elasticsearch 1.0.

Close #6485

@jpountz jpountz closed this in 01327d7 Jun 13, 2014

@jpountz jpountz deleted the jpountz:deprecation/facets branch Jun 13, 2014

@jpountz jpountz added highlight and removed breaking labels Jun 19, 2014

@clintongormley clintongormley changed the title Facets: deprecation. Docs: Facets deprecated Jul 16, 2014

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.