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

[Docs] Clarify caveats for phonetic filters replace option #42807

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 5, 2019
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 8 additions & 0 deletions docs/plugins/analysis-phonetic.asciidoc
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -65,6 +65,14 @@ GET phonetic_sample/_analyze

<1> Returns: `J`, `joe`, `BLKS`, `bloggs`

It is important to note that `"replace": false` can lead to unexpected behaviour since
the original and the phonetic version are both kept at the same token location. Some
queries, e.g. the `match` query with applied fuzzyness, ignore one of these two token
cbuescher marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
versions. This can lead to issues that are difficult to diagnose and reason about.
For this reason, it is often beneficial to use separate fields for analysis with and
without phonetic filtering. That way searches can be run against both fields with differing
boosts and trade-offs (e.g. only run fuzzy queries on the original text field, but not the
phonetic version).

[float]
===== Double metaphone settings
Expand Down