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

Create/Update the workload to incorporate new match_only_text field #151

Open
rishabhmaurya opened this issue Jan 4, 2024 · 2 comments
Open
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@rishabhmaurya
Copy link

rishabhmaurya commented Jan 4, 2024

Is your feature request related to a problem?

We have introduced a new match_only_text field type opensearch-project/OpenSearch#6836 and would like to incorporate it into one of the workload. This new field type is optimized for storage and trades off performance of positional queries like phrase query.

What solution would you like?

We can create a replica of PMC workload and use match_only_text field for all text fields.

What alternatives have you considered?

Creating a separate workload, which doesn't have the use case of positional queries but have use of full text search.

Do you have any additional context?

I ran some benchmarks earlier by modifying the field type locally to use match_only_text and here are the numbers -
opensearch-project/OpenSearch#6836 (comment)

@rishabhmaurya
Copy link
Author

@gkamat what do you suggest here?

@gkamat
Copy link
Collaborator

gkamat commented Jan 16, 2024

@rishabhmaurya It may be helpful to create a new workload to exercise the nuances and capabilities of this new field. However, updating a workload like PMC to be able to run in a match_only_text mode via a workload parameter that is not the default would add to coverage of this feature as well.

@gkamat gkamat removed the untriaged label Jan 16, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
Status: Todo
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants