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
Vanilla date histograms aggregations with no metric aggregations are already optimized and would most likely not benefit from star-tree optimization. Its specifically where metric aggregations (sum, min, max, avg) are required, those cases would gain performance benefits.
Related component
Search:Aggregations
Describe alternatives you've considered
No response
Additional context
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@msfroh - did some brainstorming on how to resolve nested aggregations effectively with @bharath-techie and came up with this design draft PR where I use a wrapper over LeafBucketCollector to resolve nested aggregations.
Considered other approaches where I tried to resolve it without a wrapper, but figuring out how to assign buckets of sub-aggregations seemed tricky.
Please let me know your initial thoughts on the draft PR (please ignore the hard-coding for now). Need comments specifically on assigning values to buckets of sub-aggregators.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe
This is to support date histogram aggregations with metric aggregations.
Example query shape:
Describe the solution you'd like
Vanilla date histograms aggregations with no metric aggregations are already optimized and would most likely not benefit from star-tree optimization. Its specifically where metric aggregations (sum, min, max, avg) are required, those cases would gain performance benefits.
Related component
Search:Aggregations
Describe alternatives you've considered
No response
Additional context
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: