Skip to content

[Lens] Field existence via 500 sample is not intuitive #58330

@timroes

Description

@timroes

We currently only sample over the first 500 documents within the configured time range and filters (once #52826 is fixed). Those 500 documents might not be very representative over the overall documents matching this filters/queries/timerange, and thus a lot of available fields might be hidden.

We currently see a high amount of confusion among users around fields not appearing because of that. It's the most common question currently raised across all sources (forums, issues, twitter...).

We should discuss how we want to handle that in a less confusing way. I have a couple of suggestions what we could do to improve this situation:

  • Increase the sample size. I don't think this will actually help us much. We'll just increase query time to load the fields, and even if we go 10 times to 5000 documents, the dataset sizes might just be too small to get a meaningful sample. Gathering the true data is also just too expensive in general to do a proper terms aggregation.
  • If a user searches for fields we might also show them fields without data that are matching their data (at least if no other fields are matching), since I think a common try to solve that issues is for users to first search for the field.

I am not sure if we have better solutions, but I think given how often this issue pops up, we need to think about how we can create a better UX here.

Similar discussion: #40277

cc @cchaos

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    Feature:LensTeam:VisualizationsTeam label for Lens, elastic-charts, Graph, legacy editors (TSVB, Visualize, Timelion) t//discussenhancementNew value added to drive a business result

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions