# BoundingBox Search takes time **URL:** \ **Category:** Elasticsearch\ **Created:** [January 31, 2012, 4:39pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556 "2012-01-31T16:39:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![prashant5375](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4491bb/32.png) [@prashant5375](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/prashant5375)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2012, 4:39pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/1 "2012-01-31T16:39:51Z")
Hi there , Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java code given below. client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- spreadOnLatitude, longii- spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time say 20 mili sec. Can any body help me on this. Thanks in advance. Regards Prashant ---
**Author:** ![kimchy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/kimchy/32/44952_2.png) [@kimchy](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/kimchy)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2012, 5:26pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/2 "2012-01-31T17:26:44Z")
You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the bottom here [Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale | Elastic](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-box-filter.html)) to have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this case. On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > Hi there , > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > code given below. > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > say 20 mili sec. > > Can any body help me on this. > > Thanks in advance. > Regards > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![kimchy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/kimchy/32/44952_2.png) [@kimchy](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/kimchy)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2012, 5:27pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/3 "2012-01-31T17:27:31Z")
Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For indexed type execution, it will help. On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the bottom here [Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale | Elastic](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-box-filter.html)) to have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this case. > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > Hi there , > > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > > code given below. > > > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > > say 20 mili sec. > > > > Can any body help me on this. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > Regards > > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![prashant5375](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4491bb/32.png) [@prashant5375](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/prashant5375)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2012, 5:33pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/4 "2012-01-31T17:33:27Z")
Hi Thanks for the reply. But can you share something using java , coz i am new to CURL . It will be great if u can explain i java language. Any java example which explains what you are saying. Regards Prashant On Jan 31, 10:27 pm, Shay Banon [kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) wrote: > Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For indexed type execution, it will help. > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > > > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the bottom herehttp://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-b...) to have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this case. > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > Hi there , > > > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > > > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > > > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > > > code given below. > > > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > > > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > > > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > > > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > > > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > > > say 20 mili sec. > > > > Can any body help me on this. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > Regards > > > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![prashant5375](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4491bb/32.png) [@prashant5375](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/prashant5375)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2012, 4:31am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/5 "2012-02-01T04:31:49Z")
hi Shay, i guess you are talking about like this String mapping = XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() .endObject().endObject().string(); But then also no luck. Can anybody help me out. Explaining better way of using BoundaryBox search in java. Regards Prashant On Jan 31, 10:33 pm, BeyondLimit [prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) wrote: > Hi Thanks for the reply. > But can you share something using java , coz i am new to CURL . > It will be great if u can explain i java language. > Any java example which explains what you are saying. > Regards > Prashant > On Jan 31, 10:27 pm, Shay Banon [kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For indexed type execution, it will help. > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > > > > > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the bottom herehttp://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-b...) to have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this case. > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > Hi there , > > > > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > > > > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > > > > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > > > > code given below. > > > > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > > > > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > > > > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > > > > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > > > > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > > > > say 20 mili sec. > > > > > Can any body help me on this. > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Regards > > > > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![kimchy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/kimchy/32/44952_2.png) [@kimchy](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/kimchy)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2012, 9:43am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/6 "2012-02-01T09:43:30Z")
Whats was not lucky? What did not work? On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 6:31 AM, BeyondLimit wrote: > hi Shay, > i guess you are talking about like this > String mapping = > XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", > "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > .endObject().endObject().string(); > But then also no luck. Can anybody help me out. Explaining better way > of using BoundaryBox search in java. > Regards > Prashant > > On Jan 31, 10:33 pm, BeyondLimit \<[prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > Hi Thanks for the reply. > > But can you share something using java , coz i am new to CURL . > > It will be great if u can explain i java language. > > Any java example which explains what you are saying. > > Regards > > Prashant > > On Jan 31, 10:27 pm, Shay Banon \<[kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For indexed type execution, it will help. > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > > > > > > > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the bottom herehttp://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-b...) to have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this case. > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > > > Hi there , > > > > > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > > > > > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > > > > > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > > > > > code given below. > > > > > > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > > > > > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > > > > > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > > > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > > > > > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > > > > > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > > > > > say 20 mili sec. > > > > > > > Can any body help me on this. > > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > Regards > > > > > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![prashant5375](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4491bb/32.png) [@prashant5375](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/prashant5375)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2012, 10:06am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/7 "2012-02-01T10:06:49Z")
Hi , I am writing the problem again : I have a big server of 25 gb ram on it. And i have a index of 13 gb . When i am running only textQuery it giving me results very fast say 10 mili sec. but when i an using boundary box its taking 200+ mili sec in query execution. How i have created the Index given below. ------Indexing------------ /\*This is the mapping i have created \*/ String mapping = XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() .endObject().endObject().string(); //And this is who i am indexing it brb.add(client.prepareIndex("test", "type", j+"").setSource(jsonBuilder().startObject() .field("recid", tmp[1]) .field("mergefield", tmp[4]) .field("mappedfsn", tmp[0].replaceAll(""", "")) .startObject("point").field("lat", Double.parseDouble(lati)).field("lon", Double.parseDouble(longi)).endObject() .endObject()) ); ------------Search------------ response = client.prepareSearch() // from NY .setQuery(filteredQuery(termQuery("mappedfsn",mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("point").cache(true).topLeft(latt+ spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- spreadOnLatitude, longii-spreadOnLongitude))) .setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); This is how i am searching. Where i m wrong in this. Regards Prashant On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Shay Banon [kimchy@gmail.com](mailto:kimchy@gmail.com) wrote: > Whats was not lucky? What did not work? > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 6:31 AM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > hi Shay, > i guess you are talking about like this > String mapping = > XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", > "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > .endObject().endObject().string(); > But then also no luck. Can anybody help me out. Explaining better way > of using BoundaryBox search in java. > Regards > Prashant > > On Jan 31, 10:33 pm, BeyondLimit [prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) wrote: > > Hi Thanks for the reply. > But can you share something using java , coz i am new to CURL . > It will be great if u can explain i java language. > Any java example which explains what you are saying. > Regards > Prashant > On Jan 31, 10:27 pm, Shay Banon [kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) wrote: > > Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, > since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For > indexed type execution, it will help. > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the > bottom herehttp:// > [Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale | Elastic](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-b)...) to > have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will > need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this > case. > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > Hi there , > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > code given below. > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > say 20 mili sec. > > Can any body help me on this. > > Thanks in advance. > Regards > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![prashant5375](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4491bb/32.png) [@prashant5375](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/prashant5375)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2012, 10:09am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/8 "2012-02-01T10:09:17Z")
Hi , I am writing the problem again : I have a big server of 25 gb ram on it. And i have a index of 13 gb . When i am running only textQuery it giving me results very fast say 10 mili sec. but when i an using boundary box its taking 200+ mili sec in query execution. How i have created the Index given below. ------Indexing------------ /\*This is the mapping i have created \*/ String mapping = XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() .endObject().endObject().string(); //And this is who i am indexing it brb.add(client.prepareIndex("test", "type", j+"").setSource(jsonBuilder().startObject() .field("recid", tmp[1]) .field("mergefield", tmp[4]) .field("mappedfsn", tmp[0].replaceAll(""", "")) .startObject("point").field("lat", Double.parseDouble(lati)).field("lon", Double.parseDouble(longi)).endObject() .endObject()) ); ------------Search------------ response = client.prepareSearch() // from NY .setQuery(filteredQuery(termQuery("mappedfsn",mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("point").cache(true).topLeft(latt+ spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- spreadOnLatitude, longii-spreadOnLongitude))) .setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); This is how i am searching. Where i m wrong in this. Regards Prashant On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Shay Banon [kimchy@gmail.com](mailto:kimchy@gmail.com) wrote: > Whats was not lucky? What did not work? > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 6:31 AM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > hi Shay, > i guess you are talking about like this > String mapping = > XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", > "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > .endObject().endObject().string(); > But then also no luck. Can anybody help me out. Explaining better way > of using BoundaryBox search in java. > Regards > Prashant > > On Jan 31, 10:33 pm, BeyondLimit [prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) wrote: > > Hi Thanks for the reply. > But can you share something using java , coz i am new to CURL . > It will be great if u can explain i java language. > Any java example which explains what you are saying. > Regards > Prashant > On Jan 31, 10:27 pm, Shay Banon [kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) wrote: > > Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, > since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For > indexed type execution, it will help. > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the > bottom herehttp:// > [Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale | Elastic](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-b)...) to > have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will > need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this > case. > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > Hi there , > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > code given below. > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > say 20 mili sec. > > Can any body help me on this. > > Thanks in advance. > Regards > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![kimchy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/kimchy/32/44952_2.png) [@kimchy](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/kimchy)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2012, 11:12am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/9 "2012-02-01T11:12:32Z")
Few problems in your code: 1. Don't set cache to true, as its meaningless when using something like bounding box since it changes all the time. If you set cache to true, it will need to go over all the docs in order to create a matching doc set for them. 2. In order to check if the indexed option is faster than the memory one, you need to call type("indexed") on the geo bounding box (or type("memory") which is the default). On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 12:09 PM, PS wrote: > Hi , > I am writing the problem again : > I have a big server of 25 gb ram on it. > And i have a index of 13 gb . When i am running only textQuery it giving me results very fast say 10 mili sec. > but when i an using boundary box its taking 200+ mili sec in query execution. > > How i have created the Index given below. > ------Indexing------------ > /\*This is the mapping i have created > \*/ > String mapping = XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > .endObject().endObject().string(); > > //And this is who i am indexing it > > brb.add(client.prepareIndex("test", "type", j+"").setSource(jsonBuilder().startObject() > .field("recid", tmp[1]) > .field("mergefield", tmp[4]) > .field("mappedfsn", tmp[0].replaceAll(""", "")) > .startObject("point").field("lat", Double.parseDouble(lati)).field("lon", Double.parseDouble(longi)).endObject() > .endObject()) > ); > > ------------Search------------ > response = client.prepareSearch() // from NY > .setQuery(filteredQuery(termQuery("mappedfsn",mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("point").cache(true).topLeft(latt+ spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- spreadOnLatitude, longii-spreadOnLongitude))) > .setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > This is how i am searching. Where i m wrong in this. > Regards > Prashant > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Shay Banon \<[kimchy@gmail.com](mailto:kimchy@gmail.com) ([mailto:kimchy@gmail.com](mailto:kimchy@gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > Whats was not lucky? What did not work? > > > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 6:31 AM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > hi Shay, > > > i guess you are talking about like this > > > String mapping = > > > XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > > > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", > > > "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > > > .endObject().endObject().string(); > > > But then also no luck. Can anybody help me out. Explaining better way > > > of using BoundaryBox search in java. > > > Regards > > > Prashant > > > > > > On Jan 31, 10:33 pm, BeyondLimit \<[prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Thanks for the reply. > > > > But can you share something using java , coz i am new to CURL . > > > > It will be great if u can explain i java language. > > > > Any java example which explains what you are saying. > > > > Regards > > > > Prashant > > > > On Jan 31, 10:27 pm, Shay Banon \<[kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For indexed type execution, it will help. > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the bottom herehttp://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-b...) to have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this case. > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi there , > > > > > > > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > > > > > > > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > > > > > > > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > > > > > > > code given below. > > > > > > > > > > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > > > > > > > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > > > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > > > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > > > > > > > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > > > > > > > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > > > > > > > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > > > > > > > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > > > > > > > say 20 mili sec. > > > > > > > > > > > Can any body help me on this. > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![prashant5375](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4491bb/32.png) [@prashant5375](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/prashant5375)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2012, 2:30pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/10 "2012-02-01T14:30:21Z")
Hi Shay I was doing hit and try thats why you see cache = true but i have removed that too , and used type("indexed") now its more slow. And if i remove type("indexed") its slow too. I have been following the Examples mention in the Elasticsearch (in github "GeoBoundingBoxTests.java"). What i am missing in it. I am badly needed this thing to be working. Earlier i used to search Using Lucene Api and search on Numeric Range Query and it was fast.But there was a problem that the retrieval of Document was slow. So on the production server i was getting response time of 80 milisec. But after reading lots of Search i cam to know about Elastic Search. Here the retrieval is fast but the Query time is much higher than what i was getting on my implementation of Lucene. If you can or any one can help me to resolve the problem Regards Prashant On Feb 1, 4:12 pm, Shay Banon [kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) wrote: > Few problems in your code: > > 1. Don't set cache to true, as its meaningless when using something like bounding box since it changes all the time. If you set cache to true, it will need to go over all the docs in order to create a matching doc set for them. > > 2. In order to check if the indexed option is faster than the memory one, you need to call type("indexed") on the geo bounding box (or type("memory") which is the default). > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 12:09 PM, PS wrote: > > > Hi , > > I am writing the problem again : > > I have a big server of 25 gb ram on it. > > And i have a index of 13 gb . When i am running only textQuery it giving me results very fast say 10 mili sec. > > but when i an using boundary box its taking 200+ mili sec in query execution. > > > How i have created the Index given below. > > ------Indexing------------ > > /\*This is the mapping i have created > > \*/ > > String mapping = XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > > .endObject().endObject().string(); > > > //And this is who i am indexing it > > > brb.add(client.prepareIndex("test", "type", j+"").setSource(jsonBuilder().startObject() > > .field("recid", tmp[1]) > > .field("mergefield", tmp[4]) > > .field("mappedfsn", tmp[0].replaceAll(""", "")) > > .startObject("point").field("lat", Double.parseDouble(lati)).field("lon", Double.parseDouble(longi)).endObject() > > .endObject()) > > ); > > > ------------Search------------ > > response = client.prepareSearch() // from NY > > .setQuery(filteredQuery(termQuery("mappedfsn",mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("point").cache(true).topLeft(latt+ spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- spreadOnLatitude, longii-spreadOnLongitude))) > > .setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > This is how i am searching. Where i m wrong in this. > > Regards > > Prashant > > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Shay Banon \<[kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) ([mailto:kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > Whats was not lucky? What did not work? > > > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 6:31 AM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > hi Shay, > > > > i guess you are talking about like this > > > > String mapping = > > > > XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > > > > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", > > > > "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > > > > .endObject().endObject().string(); > > > > But then also no luck. Can anybody help me out. Explaining better way > > > > of using BoundaryBox search in java. > > > > Regards > > > > Prashant > > > > > On Jan 31, 10:33 pm, BeyondLimit \<[prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Thanks for the reply. > > > > > But can you share something using java , coz i am new to CURL . > > > > > It will be great if u can explain i java language. > > > > > Any java example which explains what you are saying. > > > > > Regards > > > > > Prashant > > > > > On Jan 31, 10:27 pm, Shay Banon \<[kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For indexed type execution, it will help. > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the bottom herehttp://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-b...) to have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this case. > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi there , > > > > > > > > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > > > > > > > > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > > > > > > > > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > > > > > > > > code given below. > > > > > > > > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > > > > > > > > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > > > > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > > > > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > > > > > > > > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > > > > > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > > > > > > > > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > > > > > > > > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > > > > > > > > say 20 mili sec. > > > > > > > > > Can any body help me on this. > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![prashant5375](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4491bb/32.png) [@prashant5375](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/prashant5375)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2012, 5:00am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/11 "2012-02-02T05:00:49Z")
Hi Shay , I know you are very busy giving answer to others query . Can you please spare some time to answer my question i have asked in the mail chain given below. And also if there is any limitation of Elasticsearch , that too tell me. I know there must be some workaround of this problem, and only you can answer the question Regards Prashant On Feb 1, 7:30 pm, BeyondLimit [prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) wrote: > Hi Shay > I was doing hit and try thats why you see cache = true but i have > removed that too , and used type("indexed") now its more slow. > And if i remove type("indexed") its slow too. > > I have been following the Examples mention in the Elasticsearch (in > github "GeoBoundingBoxTests.java"). > What i am missing in it. I am badly needed this thing to be working. > > Earlier i used to search Using Lucene Api and search on Numeric Range > Query and it was fast.But there was a problem that the retrieval of > Document was slow. > So on the production server i was getting response time of 80 milisec. > > But after reading lots of Search i cam to know about Elastic Search. > Here the retrieval is fast but the Query time is much higher than > what i was getting on my implementation of Lucene. > > If you can or any one can help me to resolve the problem > > Regards > Prashant > > On Feb 1, 4:12 pm, Shay Banon [kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > Few problems in your code: > > > 1. Don't set cache to true, as its meaningless when using something like bounding box since it changes all the time. If you set cache to true, it will need to go over all the docs in order to create a matching doc set for them. > > > 1. In order to check if the indexed option is faster than the memory one, you need to call type("indexed") on the geo bounding box (or type("memory") which is the default). > > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 12:09 PM, PS wrote: > > > > > Hi , > > > I am writing the problem again : > > > I have a big server of 25 gb ram on it. > > > And i have a index of 13 gb . When i am running only textQuery it giving me results very fast say 10 mili sec. > > > but when i an using boundary box its taking 200+ mili sec in query execution. > > > > How i have created the Index given below. > > > ------Indexing------------ > > > /\*This is the mapping i have created > > > \*/ > > > String mapping = XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > > > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > > > .endObject().endObject().string(); > > > > //And this is who i am indexing it > > > > brb.add(client.prepareIndex("test", "type", j+"").setSource(jsonBuilder().startObject() > > > .field("recid", tmp[1]) > > > .field("mergefield", tmp[4]) > > > .field("mappedfsn", tmp[0].replaceAll(""", "")) > > > .startObject("point").field("lat", Double.parseDouble(lati)).field("lon", Double.parseDouble(longi)).endObject() > > > .endObject()) > > > ); > > > > ------------Search------------ > > > response = client.prepareSearch() // from NY > > > .setQuery(filteredQuery(termQuery("mappedfsn",mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("point").cache(true).topLeft(latt+ spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- spreadOnLatitude, longii-spreadOnLongitude))) > > > .setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > This is how i am searching. Where i m wrong in this. > > > Regards > > > Prashant > > > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Shay Banon \<[kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) ([mailto:kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > Whats was not lucky? What did not work? > > > > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 6:31 AM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > > hi Shay, > > > > > i guess you are talking about like this > > > > > String mapping = > > > > > XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > > > > > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", > > > > > "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > > > > > .endObject().endObject().string(); > > > > > But then also no luck. Can anybody help me out. Explaining better way > > > > > of using BoundaryBox search in java. > > > > > Regards > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > On Jan 31, 10:33 pm, BeyondLimit \<[prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Thanks for the reply. > > > > > > But can you share something using java , coz i am new to CURL . > > > > > > It will be great if u can explain i java language. > > > > > > Any java example which explains what you are saying. > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > On Jan 31, 10:27 pm, Shay Banon \<[kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > > Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For indexed type execution, it will help. > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the bottom herehttp://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-b...) to have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this case. > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi there , > > > > > > > > > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > > > > > > > > > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > > > > > > > > > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > > > > > > > > > code given below. > > > > > > > > > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > > > > > > > > > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > > > > > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > > > > > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > > > > > > > > > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > > > > > > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > > > > > > > > > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > > > > > > > > > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > > > > > > > > > say 20 mili sec. > > > > > > > > > > Can any body help me on this. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![Dennis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e56c9b/32.png) [@Dennis](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Dennis)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2012, 4:19pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/12 "2012-02-02T16:19:04Z")
I'm starting a project that will use geoSearch. If this is the speed, that ES does, it would be a deal killer. I would have 10's of thousands of users accessing geoSearched items all the time. I'm looking to see how this important issue is resolved. On Feb 1, 9:00 pm, BeyondLimit [prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) wrote: > Hi Shay , > I know you are very busy giving answer to others query . > Can you please spare some time to answer my question i have asked in > the mail chain given below. > And also if there is any limitation of Elasticsearch , that too tell > me. I know there must be some workaround of this problem, > and only you can answer the question > Regards > Prashant > > On Feb 1, 7:30 pm, BeyondLimit [prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > Hi Shay > > I was doing hit and try thats why you see cache = true but i have > > removed that too , and used type("indexed") now its more slow. > > And if i remove type("indexed") its slow too. > > > I have been following the Examples mention in the Elasticsearch (in > > github "GeoBoundingBoxTests.java"). > > What i am missing in it. I am badly needed this thing to be working. > > > Earlier i used to search Using Lucene Api and search on Numeric Range > > Query and it was fast.But there was a problem that the retrieval of > > Document was slow. > > So on the production server i was getting response time of 80 milisec. > > > But after reading lots of Search i cam to know about Elastic Search. > > Here the retrieval is fast but the Query time is much higher than > > what i was getting on my implementation of Lucene. > > > If you can or any one can help me to resolve the problem > > > Regards > > Prashant > > > On Feb 1, 4:12 pm, Shay Banon [kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > > Few problems in your code: > > > > 1. Don't set cache to true, as its meaningless when using something like bounding box since it changes all the time. If you set cache to true, it will need to go over all the docs in order to create a matching doc set for them. > > > > 1. In order to check if the indexed option is faster than the memory one, you need to call type("indexed") on the geo bounding box (or type("memory") which is the default). > > > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 12:09 PM, PS wrote: > > > > > > > Hi , > > > > I am writing the problem again : > > > > I have a big server of 25 gb ram on it. > > > > And i have a index of 13 gb . When i am running only textQuery it giving me results very fast say 10 mili sec. > > > > but when i an using boundary box its taking 200+ mili sec in query execution. > > > > > How i have created the Index given below. > > > > ------Indexing------------ > > > > /\*This is the mapping i have created > > > > \*/ > > > > String mapping = XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > > > > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > > > > .endObject().endObject().string(); > > > > > //And this is who i am indexing it > > > > > brb.add(client.prepareIndex("test", "type", j+"").setSource(jsonBuilder().startObject() > > > > .field("recid", tmp[1]) > > > > .field("mergefield", tmp[4]) > > > > .field("mappedfsn", tmp[0].replaceAll(""", "")) > > > > .startObject("point").field("lat", Double.parseDouble(lati)).field("lon", Double.parseDouble(longi)).endObject() > > > > .endObject()) > > > > ); > > > > > ------------Search------------ > > > > response = client.prepareSearch() // from NY > > > > .setQuery(filteredQuery(termQuery("mappedfsn",mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("point").cache(true).topLeft(latt+ spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- spreadOnLatitude, longii-spreadOnLongitude))) > > > > .setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > > This is how i am searching. Where i m wrong in this. > > > > Regards > > > > Prashant > > > > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Shay Banon \<[kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) ([mailto:kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Whats was not lucky? What did not work? > > > > > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 6:31 AM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > > > hi Shay, > > > > > > i guess you are talking about like this > > > > > > String mapping = > > > > > > XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > > > > > > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", > > > > > > "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > > > > > > .endObject().endObject().string(); > > > > > > But then also no luck. Can anybody help me out. Explaining better way > > > > > > of using BoundaryBox search in java. > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > > On Jan 31, 10:33 pm, BeyondLimit \<[prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Thanks for the reply. > > > > > > > But can you share something using java , coz i am new to CURL . > > > > > > > It will be great if u can explain i java language. > > > > > > > Any java example which explains what you are saying. > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > > On Jan 31, 10:27 pm, Shay Banon \<[kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For indexed type execution, it will help. > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the bottom herehttp://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-b...) to have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this case. > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi there , > > > > > > > > > > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > > > > > > > > > > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > > > > > > > > > > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > > > > > > > > > > code given below. > > > > > > > > > > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > > > > > > > > > > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > > > > > > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > > > > > > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > > > > > > > > > > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > > > > > > > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > > > > > > > > > > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > > > > > > > > > > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > > > > > > > > > > say 20 mili sec. > > > > > > > > > > > Can any body help me on this. > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![prashant5375](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4491bb/32.png) [@prashant5375](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/prashant5375)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2012, 4:52pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/13 "2012-02-05T16:52:56Z")
Hi Shay, I have been seen you are replying to the queries of other. Please let me know when can i expect the answer of my query. Regards Prashant On Feb 2, 10:00 am, BeyondLimit [prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) wrote: > Hi Shay , > I know you are very busy giving answer to others query . > Can you please spare some time to answer my question i have asked in > the mail chain given below. > And also if there is any limitation of Elasticsearch , that too tell > me. I know there must be some workaround of this problem, > and only you can answer the question > Regards > Prashant > > On Feb 1, 7:30 pm, BeyondLimit [prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > Hi Shay > > I was doing hit and try thats why you see cache = true but i have > > removed that too , and used type("indexed") now its more slow. > > And if i remove type("indexed") its slow too. > > > I have been following the Examples mention in the Elasticsearch (in > > github "GeoBoundingBoxTests.java"). > > What i am missing in it. I am badly needed this thing to be working. > > > Earlier i used to search Using Lucene Api and search on Numeric Range > > Query and it was fast.But there was a problem that the retrieval of > > Document was slow. > > So on the production server i was getting response time of 80 milisec. > > > But after reading lots of Search i cam to know about Elastic Search. > > Here the retrieval is fast but the Query time is much higher than > > what i was getting on my implementation of Lucene. > > > If you can or any one can help me to resolve the problem > > > Regards > > Prashant > > > On Feb 1, 4:12 pm, Shay Banon [kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > > Few problems in your code: > > > > 1. Don't set cache to true, as its meaningless when using something like bounding box since it changes all the time. If you set cache to true, it will need to go over all the docs in order to create a matching doc set for them. > > > > 1. In order to check if the indexed option is faster than the memory one, you need to call type("indexed") on the geo bounding box (or type("memory") which is the default). > > > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 12:09 PM, PS wrote: > > > > > > > Hi , > > > > I am writing the problem again : > > > > I have a big server of 25 gb ram on it. > > > > And i have a index of 13 gb . When i am running only textQuery it giving me results very fast say 10 mili sec. > > > > but when i an using boundary box its taking 200+ mili sec in query execution. > > > > > How i have created the Index given below. > > > > ------Indexing------------ > > > > /\*This is the mapping i have created > > > > \*/ > > > > String mapping = XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > > > > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > > > > .endObject().endObject().string(); > > > > > //And this is who i am indexing it > > > > > brb.add(client.prepareIndex("test", "type", j+"").setSource(jsonBuilder().startObject() > > > > .field("recid", tmp[1]) > > > > .field("mergefield", tmp[4]) > > > > .field("mappedfsn", tmp[0].replaceAll(""", "")) > > > > .startObject("point").field("lat", Double.parseDouble(lati)).field("lon", Double.parseDouble(longi)).endObject() > > > > .endObject()) > > > > ); > > > > > ------------Search------------ > > > > response = client.prepareSearch() // from NY > > > > .setQuery(filteredQuery(termQuery("mappedfsn",mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("point").cache(true).topLeft(latt+ spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- spreadOnLatitude, longii-spreadOnLongitude))) > > > > .setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > > This is how i am searching. Where i m wrong in this. > > > > Regards > > > > Prashant > > > > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Shay Banon \<[kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) ([mailto:kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Whats was not lucky? What did not work? > > > > > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 6:31 AM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > > > hi Shay, > > > > > > i guess you are talking about like this > > > > > > String mapping = > > > > > > XContentFactory.jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type") > > > > > > .startObject("properties").startObject("point").field("type", > > > > > > "geo\_point").field("lat\_lon", true).endObject().endObject() > > > > > > .endObject().endObject().string(); > > > > > > But then also no luck. Can anybody help me out. Explaining better way > > > > > > of using BoundaryBox search in java. > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > > On Jan 31, 10:33 pm, BeyondLimit \<[prashant.vi...@gmail.com](mailto:prashant.vi...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Thanks for the reply. > > > > > > > But can you share something using java , coz i am new to CURL . > > > > > > > It will be great if u can explain i java language. > > > > > > > Any java example which explains what you are saying. > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > > On Jan 31, 10:27 pm, Shay Banon \<[kim...@gmail.com](mailto:kim...@gmail.com) ([http://gmail.com](http://gmail.com))\> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Also note, that having the index in ram drive will not matter that much, since by default the bbox checks are done in memory with values loaded. For indexed type execution, it will help. > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Shay Banon wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can try and use different execution mode (documented under type at the bottom herehttp://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/query-dsl/geo-bounding-b...) to have it indexed instead of done in memory. As explained there, you will need to have the geo\_point type mapping index the lat/lon as well in this case. > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:39 PM, BeyondLimit wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi there , > > > > > > > > > > Actually i have just stated using Elastic Search , and i have a > > > > > > > > > > situation where in i have to search in the Boundary of lat/long . > > > > > > > > > > When i have created the boundary and performed the search using java > > > > > > > > > > code given below. > > > > > > > > > > > client.prepareSearch() .setQuery(filteredQuery(textQuery("mappedfsn", > > > > > > > > > > mapped), geoBoundingBoxFilter("location").topLeft(latt+ > > > > > > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii+ spreadOnLongitude).bottomRight(latt- > > > > > > > > > > spreadOnLatitude, longii- > > > > > > > > > > spreadOnLongitude))).setSize(NumRes).execute().actionGet(); > > > > > > > > > > > I found the search taking too much of time (200 mili sec on the Big > > > > > > > > > > Server with 24gb of ram on it and i kept index on the Ram Disk too) > > > > > > > > > > Now if i remove the boundingbox condition i get the result in no time > > > > > > > > > > say 20 mili sec. > > > > > > > > > > > Can any body help me on this. > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > Prashant ---
**Author:** ![gearond](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gearond](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/gearond)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2012, 5:01pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/14 "2012-03-04T17:01:52Z")
did you get this resolved? I used solr with a plugin that pre indexed the geocode into a special format, and it was blindingly fast. I think that they were suggesting somethng like that. did you do that kind of indexing? ---
**Author:** ![prashant5375](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4491bb/32.png) [@prashant5375](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/prashant5375)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2012, 3:56am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/15 "2012-03-05T03:56:52Z")
Hi there , No i did not get that resolved. I did not understand what are you talking about. Can you please explain bit more so that i can follow the steps . Thanks in advance. \_Prashant On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 10:31 PM, gearond [gearond@sbcglobal.net](mailto:gearond@sbcglobal.net) wrote: > did you get this resolved? I used solr with a plugin that pre indexed the > geocode into a special format, and it was blindingly fast. I think that > they > were suggesting somethng like that. did you do that kind of indexing? > > -- > View this message in context: > [http://elasticsearch-users.115913.n3.nabble.com/BoundingBox-Search-takes-time-tp3703932p3798475.html](http://elasticsearch-users.115913.n3.nabble.com/BoundingBox-Search-takes-time-tp3703932p3798475.html) > Sent from the Elasticsearch Users mailing list archive at [Nabble.com](http://Nabble.com). ---
**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/3X/1/a/1ac57faf039f6b580b3f104ef42a2a89e41014de.png) [@system](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/system)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2017, 3:37am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/boundingbox-search-takes-time/6556/16 "2017-07-06T03:37:24Z")