Aggs: Fix significant terms not finding background documents for nested fields#128472
Merged
ivancea merged 14 commits intoelastic:mainfrom Jun 4, 2025
Merged
Conversation
ivancea
added
>bug
:Analytics/Aggregations
Collaborator
|
Hi @ivancea, I've created a changelog YAML for you. |
ivancea
commented
May 27, 2025
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To help a bit with the review, these tests have:
- Setup: Index with a type ("normal" and "outlier"), and a value (1 and 2). That value is replicated 6 times (integer and keyword, and then as a nested and doubly nested field. Every "value" field has the same value in each document, so testing against each of them should render the same results.
- A first "Checking" test to ensure all data ingested is correct
- Test cases for the 3 kinds of values (normal, nested, doubly nested). Each of them do a sig_terms expecting the same results (except for the background_filter one)
Collaborator
|
Pinging @elastic/es-analytical-engine (Team:Analytics) |
ivancea
commented
May 27, 2025
Comment on lines
+225
to
+226
| var nestedParentField = context.nestedLookup().getNestedParent(fieldType.name()); | ||
| if (nestedParentField != null) { |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if this is the best way to detect a nested field, but it worked well, and I didn't find any edge case
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@martijnvg, do you know the most right way to do this?
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder if buildQuery should take the nested context into account? That sounds like a bigger change than I'd like to make to aggs at the moment.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It has been some time since I worked on nested related functionality. Assuming that fieldType.name() returns a path, then I think this is the right way to figure out the parent field.
Collaborator
|
Hi @ivancea, I've updated the changelog YAML for you. |
ivancea
changed the title
ivancea
added
auto-backport
nik9000
approved these changes
Jun 3, 2025
Collaborator
ivancea
added a commit
to ivancea/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 4, 2025
…ed fields (elastic#128472) Closes elastic#101163 Fixes the `significant_terms` aggregation not working correctly on nested fields.
ivancea
added a commit
to ivancea/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 4, 2025
…ed fields (elastic#128472) Closes elastic#101163 Fixes the `significant_terms` aggregation not working correctly on nested fields.
ivancea
added a commit
to ivancea/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 5, 2025
…ed fields (elastic#128472) Closes elastic#101163 Fixes the `significant_terms` aggregation not working correctly on nested fields.
ivancea
added a commit
to ivancea/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 5, 2025
…ed fields (elastic#128472) Closes elastic#101163 Fixes the `significant_terms` aggregation not working correctly on nested fields.
This was referenced Jun 5, 2025
Merged
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
4 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.
Closes #101163
Fixes the
significant_termsaggregation not working correctly on nested fields.It was returning buckets with
bg_count: 0, meaning it wasn't detecting any background document.The filter it used to check for background documents was a plain TermsQuery, which wouldn't work on Nested fields.
The PR adds an extra NestedQuery wrapping the Terms in case the field is inside a Nested parent.
SignificantTextwas also checked, but it's explicitly documented that it doesn't work on text fields, as it needs to access the source.TBD: Backports