Yeah, it does matter because previously I had to add match_all to empty 
queries if I was need to get all the results in case of empty query. It 
seems currently any empty query replaces with match_all (this follows from 
your links), so I don't need to use it explicitly anymore. Am I correct?

I just need to confirm this to remove obsolete code from my library.

понедельник, 9 июня 2014 г., 14:28:07 UTC+7 пользователь Ivan Brusic 
написал:
>
> Does it matter? From what I can tell, some code was added in 0.90
>
>
> https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/commit/6687ecb038b55416d4bb37d29746e86f2624f06b
>
> https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/blob/master/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/index/query/FilteredQueryParser.java#L54
>
> -- 
> Ivan
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 9:34 PM, Arkadiy Zabazhanov <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> Guys, I still need help, A've tried to change filtered query strategies. 
>> It returns all the filtered results anyway for versions 1.0.0 - 1.2.1. When 
>> this behavior was changed and how? Why don't I need match_all for filtered 
>> query with empty query?
>>
>> пятница, 6 июня 2014 г., 7:14:28 UTC+7 пользователь Arkadiy Zabazhanov 
>> написал:
>>
>>> Yeah, I've got ehis already, thanks.
>>>
>>> I'm still confused why filtered query is returning all results even 
>>> without match_all in filtered query.
>>>
>>> четверг, 5 июня 2014 г., 6:21:03 UTC+7 пользователь Ivan Brusic написал:
>>>>
>>>> There is no label, but the change was made last December:
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/pull/4461
>>>>
>>>> It appears that the REST API still supports the old notation, but the 
>>>> change did break Java backwards compatibility
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/
>>>> blob/master/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/search/query/
>>>> QueryPhase.java#L71
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Ivan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Arkadiy Zabazhanov <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Btw, Answer for the second question is top-level filter was renamed to 
>>>>> post_filter. That's awesome. So the first question is answered too. 
>>>>> Filtered query is preferred.
>>>>> Still waiting for an answer for the third question. Since I didn't 
>>>>> find filter to post_filter renaming in changelog (
>>>>> http://www.elasticsearch.org/downloads/1-0-0/) and I can't find 
>>>>> anything about new query behavior. I need just version where was it 
>>>>> changed, please.
>>>>>
>>>>> вторник, 3 июня 2014 г., 19:27:17 UTC+7 пользователь Arkadiy 
>>>>> Zabazhanov написал:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello. Help me please, I'm confused. As far as I remember, there was 
>>>>>> the only way to pass filters to search query - via filtered query. But 
>>>>>> currently there is a top-level filter part of the query. However, 
>>>>>> top-level filter affects query only and doesn't affect i.e. facets. 
>>>>>> But filtered query filter affects both of the query and facets 
>>>>>> facilities. Also, I remember there was a time I need to add match_all 
>>>>>> query 
>>>>>> to filtered query section if query was empty and filters only was 
>>>>>> present. Otherwise returned empty set of documents. Since I'm trying to 
>>>>>> create high-level Ruby library could you please answer following 
>>>>>> questions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Which way is preferred now and in future: filtered top-level query 
>>>>>> or top-level filter with top-level query?
>>>>>> 2) How do you plan to resolve such an API inconsistency when filtered 
>>>>>> query filter affects outside statements and top-level filter doesn't 
>>>>>> affect 
>>>>>> some parts of request?
>>>>>> 3) Why do I remember about match_all feature and when did requests 
>>>>>> started to return all the documents with empty query section in filtered 
>>>>>> query? I'm checking it right now on 1.2.0 and I don't need to use 
>>>>>> match_all, or constant_score it just returns all the docs for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>  -- 
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>> Groups "elasticsearch" group.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
>>>>> msgid/elasticsearch/c8bddc46-7347-4ca9-a9ea-65100a017673%
>>>>> 40googlegroups.com 
>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/c8bddc46-7347-4ca9-a9ea-65100a017673%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "elasticsearch" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/811a5138-21d1-4ad0-a051-510a7494be65%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/811a5138-21d1-4ad0-a051-510a7494be65%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/3f0cd8ef-a31c-41a4-96b3-eef233b0fda9%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to