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

[Feature Request] Aggregations for the flat_object type #14225

Open
ivanguravel opened this issue Jun 12, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

[Feature Request] Aggregations for the flat_object type #14225

ivanguravel opened this issue Jun 12, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
backlog enhancement Enhancement or improvement to existing feature or request Search:Aggregations

Comments

@ivanguravel
Copy link

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe

In general there is no support of the aggregations inside the OpenSearch for now. Reference is available here .
Absence of this functionality is painful in case of integration OpenSearch with Grafana.

Describe the solution you'd like

It could be great something like the same functionality in ElasticSearch

Related component

Search:Aggregations

Describe alternatives you've considered

In terms of absence of this functionality there are some workarounds present. The easiest one is about reindex with moving related field for aggregation from the flat_object to keyword.

Additional context

No response

@ivanguravel ivanguravel added enhancement Enhancement or improvement to existing feature or request untriaged labels Jun 12, 2024
@etolbakov
Copy link

Just copying the message from @msfroh

the prefix-based filtering that I’m adding in #14371 could be used to efficiently allow terms aggregations on flat_object fields with a given path (or multiple paths).

So maybe it will resolve this issue as well

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backlog enhancement Enhancement or improvement to existing feature or request Search:Aggregations
Projects
Status: Later (6 months plus)
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants