[Lens] Duplicate labels on the filters or ranges aggregation result in missing data

[wylieconlon]

Scenario

1. Create an XY chart
2. Set the X axis to the filters agg, and create a filter with the label "A"
3. Create a different filter with the label "A"
4. Only one bar is shown with the label "A", where the second filter is excluded

Users can easily work around this issue by changing one of the names to be unique.

Open questions about what users intend

It's not clear what the expected behavior is, but it is likely one of these:

a. Users never want duplicate labels and expect Lens to assign unique names
b. Users never want duplicate labels and expect it to be an error
c. Users sometimes want duplicate labels, and they expect the data to be combined into the same name
d. Users sometimes want duplicate labels, and expect to see two sets of data with the same names

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/kibana-app (Team:KibanaApp)

[flash1293]

cc @AlonaNadler what do you think the expected behavior would be?

Duplicate labels might be meaningful if the difference is obvious from the context, e.g. a user could configure filters like this:

• Traffic from China (geo.src:CN)
• Excluding css (geo.src:CN AND NOT extension:css)
• Traffic from US (geo.src:US)
• Excluding css (geo.src:US AND NOT extension:css)
• Traffic from DE (geo.src:DE)
• Excluding css (geo.src:DE AND NOT extension:css)

But I'm not sure whether that's worth it (it's also technically harder to implement this than a validation that ensures unique names via option a. or option b.)

[AlonaNadler]

I think it's an edge case so be careful not to invest too much into it.
In general, I would allow users to have the same labels and show two sets of data with the same names

[flash1293]

@AlonaNadler That's the most expensive option in terms of development effort. If we should solve it cleanly without investing too much, going with showing an error in the form seems like the easiest way.

[AlonaNadler]

I always had an expensive taste ;)

If we should solve it cleanly without investing too much, going with showing an error in the form seems like the easiest way.

sounds good

[markov00]

In order to provide better transparency of priorities, issues that will not be prioritized within the next 24 months are being closed.

Tracking request in Lens general improvements ice box #184459