# Cardinality Aggregation gives wrong number? **URL:** \ **Category:** Elasticsearch\ **Created:** [February 5, 2019, 12:15pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cardinality-aggregation-gives-wrong-number/167116 "2019-02-05T12:15:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 33
**Author:** ![Mark\_Harwood](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/mark_harwood/32/10538_2.png) [@Mark\_Harwood](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Mark_Harwood)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2019, 12:10pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cardinality-aggregation-gives-wrong-number/167116/33 "2019-02-07T12:10:36Z")
> [@Wassim\_Ben\_Amor](#): > > i am disappointed that elastic can not produce an exact analytics result even on low data size. Everything elasticsearch does is designed for scale. We don't want to build data analysis functions that blow up when users provide us with a lot of data. > [@Wassim\_Ben\_Amor](#): > > i'm sure Elastic is not made for analytics, I need a better big data solution. The world of big data is, by necessity, built on fuzzier constructs [1]. We're using the same algorithms used by the other big data platforms for exactly the same reasons. As I outlined [here](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/background-count-in-significant-terms-not-consistent/55824/8) - it's a necessary trade off in the age of big data. You can't expect to beat physics. Arguably we could offer a function to guarantee cardinality accuracy at small scale but small scale is not our mission. [1] [Introduction to Probabilistic Data Structures - DZone](https://dzone.com/articles/introduction-probabilistic-0) --- _[View the full topic](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cardinality-aggregation-gives-wrong-number/167116)._