-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.1k
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
Buggy custom fuzziness using AUTO:[low],[high] #39614
Labels
>bug
:Search/Search
Search-related issues that do not fall into other categories
v7.0.0-rc2
v7.2.0
v8.0.0-alpha1
Comments
Pinging @elastic/es-search |
cbuescher
pushed a commit
to cbuescher/elasticsearch
that referenced
this issue
Mar 4, 2019
Currently Fuzziness#asDistance(String) doesn't work for custom AUTO values. If the fuzziness is AUTO, the method returns the correct edit distance to use, depending on the input string, but for custom AUTO values it currently always returns an edit distance of 1. Correcting this and adding unit and integration tests to catch these cases. Closes elastic#39614
@fadijabi thanks, I think I found the issue and opened a PR to fix this. |
cbuescher
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 5, 2019
Currently Fuzziness#asDistance(String) doesn't work for custom AUTO values. If the fuzziness is AUTO, the method returns the correct edit distance to use, depending on the input string, but for custom AUTO values it currently always returns an edit distance of 1. Correcting this and adding unit and integration tests to catch these cases. Closes #39614
cbuescher
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 5, 2019
Currently Fuzziness#asDistance(String) doesn't work for custom AUTO values. If the fuzziness is AUTO, the method returns the correct edit distance to use, depending on the input string, but for custom AUTO values it currently always returns an edit distance of 1. Correcting this and adding unit and integration tests to catch these cases. Closes #39614
cbuescher
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 5, 2019
Currently Fuzziness#asDistance(String) doesn't work for custom AUTO values. If the fuzziness is AUTO, the method returns the correct edit distance to use, depending on the input string, but for custom AUTO values it currently always returns an edit distance of 1. Correcting this and adding unit and integration tests to catch these cases. Closes #39614
cbuescher
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 5, 2019
Currently Fuzziness#asDistance(String) doesn't work for custom AUTO values. If the fuzziness is AUTO, the method returns the correct edit distance to use, depending on the input string, but for custom AUTO values it currently always returns an edit distance of 1. Correcting this and adding unit and integration tests to catch these cases. Closes #39614
cbuescher
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 5, 2019
Currently Fuzziness#asDistance(String) doesn't work for custom AUTO values. If the fuzziness is AUTO, the method returns the correct edit distance to use, depending on the input string, but for custom AUTO values it currently always returns an edit distance of 1. Correcting this and adding unit and integration tests to catch these cases. Closes #39614
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
>bug
:Search/Search
Search-related issues that do not fall into other categories
v7.0.0-rc2
v7.2.0
v8.0.0-alpha1
Hello,
I am using elasticsearch v6.6.1 and I still feel that custom fuzziness using AUTO:[low],[high] is still defaulting to AUTO or something.
I have a field named "featuretype" of type "keyword" and if I execute
GET my_index/_search { "query": { "match": { "featuretype": { "query": "Uniy", "operator": "AND", "fuzziness": "auto:5,8", "prefix_length": 1, "fuzzy_transpositions": false } } } }
I still get results where featuretype are "Unit" although I did a mistake "Uniy". As per my understanding AUTO:5,8 will
0..4
Must match exactly
5..7
One edit allowed
greater than 7
Two edits allowed
The expected result is not to match any result as in this case.
Any help is appreciated?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: