-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.3k
Adds disclaimer on field_caps include_empty_fields
flag when set to false
#106861
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Documentation preview: |
Pinging @elastic/es-docs (Team:Docs) |
Pinging @elastic/es-search (Team:Search) |
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ include::{es-repo-dir}/rest-api/common-parms.asciidoc[tag=index-ignore-unavailab | |||
Defaults to `false`. | |||
|
|||
`include_empty_fields`:: | |||
(Optional, Boolean) If `false`, fields that never had a value in any shards are not included in the response. Fields that are not empty are always included. This flag does not consider deletions and updates. If a field was non-empty and all the documents containing that field were deleted or the field was removed by updates, it will still be returned even if the flag is `false`. | |||
(Optional, Boolean) If `false`, fields that never had a value in any shards are not included in the response. Fields that are not empty are always included. This flag does not consider deletions and updates. If a field was non-empty and all the documents containing that field were deleted or the field was removed by updates, it will still be returned even if the flag is `false`. To be used with caution, if set to `false` it gives accurate results at the cost of longer response times compared to the default behavior. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could you expand on what the factor is that causes longer response times, so users have the knowledge to decide and adequately test?
I wonder if we should have a warning flag like we do in other cases, that makes it more evident compared to a note in the text.
Pinging @elastic/es-search-foundations (Team:Search Foundations) |
Important Elastic documentation is migrating to Markdown for version 9.0+. See the migration guide for details. ℹ️ What's happening?
What do I need to do?For <=8.x docs:
For 9.0+ docs:Option 1:
Option 2:
💡 Need help?
|
@piergm we never got this in :) |
No description provided.