Fix match_only_text for keyword multi-fields with ignore_above#131314
Merged
jordan-powers merged 1 commit intoelastic:mainfrom Jul 15, 2025
Merged
Conversation
jordan-powers
added
>non-issue
auto-backport
Collaborator
|
Pinging @elastic/es-storage-engine (Team:StorageEngine) |
lkts
approved these changes
Jul 15, 2025
| } | ||
| return storedFieldFetcher(parentField); | ||
| } else if (parent.hasDocValues()) { | ||
| var ifd = searchExecutionContext.getForField(parent, MappedFieldType.FielddataOperation.SEARCH); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems like there can be a similar problem here because doc values won't include ignored values? Not sure if that matters though.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shoot you're right. If the keyword field is store: false, doc_values: true, we don't error, but we completely omit the value from the match_only_text field results.
I'll work on a follow-up PR to address this.
parkertimmins
approved these changes
Jul 15, 2025
jordan-powers
added a commit
to jordan-powers/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 15, 2025
Collaborator
💔 Backport failed
You can use sqren/backport to manually backport by running |
Contributor
Author
💚 All backports created successfully
Questions ?Please refer to the Backport tool documentation |
elasticsearchmachine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 15, 2025
jordan-powers
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 15, 2025
kkrik-es
reviewed
Jul 16, 2025
...per-extras/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/index/mapper/extras/MatchOnlyTextFieldMapper.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
kkrik-es
reviewed
Jul 16, 2025
| if (names.length == 1) { | ||
| return storedFields.get(names[0]); | ||
| } | ||
| return Arrays.stream(names).map(storedFields::get).filter(Objects::nonNull).flatMap(List::stream).toList(); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: streams are not very efficient, it's better to avoid them for code that runs per document.
jordan-powers
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2025
In #131314 we fixed match_only_text fields with ignore_above keyword multi-fields in the case that the keyword multi-field is stored. However, the issue is still present if the keyword field is not stored, but instead has doc values. This patch fixes that case.
jordan-powers
added a commit
to jordan-powers/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2025
In elastic#131314 we fixed match_only_text fields with ignore_above keyword multi-fields in the case that the keyword multi-field is stored. However, the issue is still present if the keyword field is not stored, but instead has doc values. This patch fixes that case.
jordan-powers
added a commit
to jordan-powers/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2025
In elastic#131314 we fixed match_only_text fields with ignore_above keyword multi-fields in the case that the keyword multi-field is stored. However, the issue is still present if the keyword field is not stored, but instead has doc values. This patch fixes that case.
elasticsearchmachine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2025
In #131314 we fixed match_only_text fields with ignore_above keyword multi-fields in the case that the keyword multi-field is stored. However, the issue is still present if the keyword field is not stored, but instead has doc values. This patch fixes that case.
elasticsearchmachine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2025
In #131314 we fixed match_only_text fields with ignore_above keyword multi-fields in the case that the keyword multi-field is stored. However, the issue is still present if the keyword field is not stored, but instead has doc values. This patch fixes that case.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In #129126, we stopped double-storing match_only_text fields when they are part of a multi-field, instead extracting the value when needed from the appropriate multi-field mapper.
This introduced an edge case related to ignore_above on keyword fields. If the associated multi-field mapper is a keyword mapper, and if that keyword mapper has ignore_above specified, and a document triggers the ignore_above case, then the original value will be stored in
<foo>._originalinstead of<foo>. In this case, the match_only_text mapper needs to look at the<foo>._originalstored field.Resolves #131298