# Cross Fields w/ Fuzziness
**URL:** https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cross-fields-w-fuzziness/16846
**Category:** Elasticsearch
**Created:** [April 7, 2014, 1:59pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cross-fields-w-fuzziness/16846 "2014-04-07T13:59:54Z")
**Posts on this page:** 8
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@chuck](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/chuck)
#### Post date: [April 7, 2014, 1:59pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cross-fields-w-fuzziness/16846/1 "2014-04-07T13:59:54Z")
Hi Elasticsearch,
I've been playing with the new cross\_fields multi match type, and I've got
to say that I love it. It's a great way to search complex data without
doing a lot of memory killing denormalization. That said, is there any
plan to implement a fuzziness option with this type? That would certainly
be very valuable.
- Elliott
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com](mailto:elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com).
To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/8d76d304-f74d-4d05-9920-5cd98b84cb2a%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/8d76d304-f74d-4d05-9920-5cd98b84cb2a%40googlegroups.com).
For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout).
---
### Author:  [@chuck](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/chuck)
#### Post date: [April 10, 2014, 12:23pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cross-fields-w-fuzziness/16846/2 "2014-04-10T12:23:29Z")
Any thoughts on this?
The search type is really fantastic and we're already using it in
production, but a fuzziness capability would add so much.
On Monday, April 7, 2014 9:59:54 AM UTC-4, Elliott Bradshaw wrote:
> Hi Elasticsearch,
>
> I've been playing with the new cross\_fields multi match type, and I've got
> to say that I love it. It's a great way to search complex data without
> doing a lot of memory killing denormalization. That said, is there any
> plan to implement a fuzziness option with this type? That would certainly
> be very valuable.
>
> - Elliott
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com](mailto:elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com).
To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/25182266-cf32-4dcd-9081-d966e952e0a2%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/25182266-cf32-4dcd-9081-d966e952e0a2%40googlegroups.com).
For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout).
---
### Author:  [@Samuel\_Nilsson](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Samuel_Nilsson)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2014, 12:39pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cross-fields-w-fuzziness/16846/3 "2014-04-16T12:39:51Z")
I have the same issue, I would like to be able to do a fuzzy search for
some of my fields in a multi\_match query of type cross\_fields. Right now I
have to do two queries but gives me a disjunct set rather than a
conjunctive result:
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"should": [
{
"multi\_match": {
"query": "foo 500",
"type": "cross\_fields",
"operator": "and",
"analyzer": "standard",
"fields": [
"display\_name",
"strength\_text",
"vnr",
"manufacturer",
"categories",
"amount\_text",
"color\_code",
"item\_size\_text"
]
}
},
{
"match": {
"display\_name": {
"query": "foo 500",
"fuzziness": "auto"
}
}
}
]
}
},
"size": 150,
"from": 0
}
The second match query adds a bunch of hits which makes the first hit
irrelevant..
Does anyone have a solution to this?
Den torsdagen den 10:e april 2014 kl. 14:23:29 UTC+2 skrev Elliott Bradshaw:
> Any thoughts on this?
>
> The search type is really fantastic and we're already using it in
> production, but a fuzziness capability would add so much.
>
> On Monday, April 7, 2014 9:59:54 AM UTC-4, Elliott Bradshaw wrote:
>
> > Hi Elasticsearch,
> >
> > I've been playing with the new cross\_fields multi match type, and I've
> > got to say that I love it. It's a great way to search complex data without
> > doing a lot of memory killing denormalization. That said, is there any
> > plan to implement a fuzziness option with this type? That would certainly
> > be very valuable.
> >
> > - Elliott
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com](mailto:elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com).
To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/90838e39-49c6-4446-abc8-1d2781ffd0e2%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/90838e39-49c6-4446-abc8-1d2781ffd0e2%40googlegroups.com).
For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout).
---
### Author:  [@Ryan\_Tanner](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Ryan_Tanner)
#### Post date: [May 7, 2014, 8:00pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cross-fields-w-fuzziness/16846/4 "2014-05-07T20:00:25Z")
Any update to this?
On Monday, April 7, 2014 7:59:54 AM UTC-6, Elliott Bradshaw wrote:
> Hi Elasticsearch,
>
> I've been playing with the new cross\_fields multi match type, and I've got
> to say that I love it. It's a great way to search complex data without
> doing a lot of memory killing denormalization. That said, is there any
> plan to implement a fuzziness option with this type? That would certainly
> be very valuable.
>
> - Elliott
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com](mailto:elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com).
To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/51e425aa-cb06-4127-9b4d-a6bd5c123110%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/51e425aa-cb06-4127-9b4d-a6bd5c123110%40googlegroups.com).
For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout).
---
### Author:  [@Tom\_4](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Tom_4)
#### Post date: [May 16, 2014, 2:21pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cross-fields-w-fuzziness/16846/5 "2014-05-16T14:21:53Z")
+1 fuzziness would be great when using cross\_fields
Am Mittwoch, 7. Mai 2014 22:00:25 UTC+2 schrieb Ryan Tanner:
> Any update to this?
>
> On Monday, April 7, 2014 7:59:54 AM UTC-6, Elliott Bradshaw wrote:
>
> > Hi Elasticsearch,
> >
> > I've been playing with the new cross\_fields multi match type, and I've
> > got to say that I love it. It's a great way to search complex data without
> > doing a lot of memory killing denormalization. That said, is there any
> > plan to implement a fuzziness option with this type? That would certainly
> > be very valuable.
> >
> > - Elliott
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com](mailto:elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com).
To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/119435db-2635-4866-90de-762685e22d41%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/119435db-2635-4866-90de-762685e22d41%40googlegroups.com).
For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout).
---
### Author:  [@chuck](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/chuck)
#### Post date: [July 17, 2014, 12:44pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cross-fields-w-fuzziness/16846/6 "2014-07-17T12:44:29Z")
I realize that this post is getting a little old, but does the community
have any feedback on the feasibility of this?
On Friday, May 16, 2014 10:21:53 AM UTC-4, Tom wrote:
> +1 fuzziness would be great when using cross\_fields
>
> Am Mittwoch, 7. Mai 2014 22:00:25 UTC+2 schrieb Ryan Tanner:
>
> > Any update to this?
> >
> > On Monday, April 7, 2014 7:59:54 AM UTC-6, Elliott Bradshaw wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Elasticsearch,
> > >
> > > I've been playing with the new cross\_fields multi match type, and I've
> > > got to say that I love it. It's a great way to search complex data without
> > > doing a lot of memory killing denormalization. That said, is there any
> > > plan to implement a fuzziness option with this type? That would certainly
> > > be very valuable.
> > >
> > > - Elliott
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com](mailto:elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com).
To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/6170beb4-36d5-4323-93a1-14a612f601fa%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/6170beb4-36d5-4323-93a1-14a612f601fa%40googlegroups.com).
For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout).
---
### Author:  [@Aurelien\_FOUCRET](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Aurelien_FOUCRET)
#### Post date: [July 18, 2014, 1:00pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cross-fields-w-fuzziness/16846/7 "2014-07-18T13:00:23Z")
Hi,
I submit an issue few days ago about this
: [Fuziness ignored when multi\_match query type is set to cross\_fields. · Issue #6866 · elastic/elasticsearch · GitHub](https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/issues/6866).
Le jeudi 17 juillet 2014 14:44:29 UTC+2, Elliott Bradshaw a écrit :
> I realize that this post is getting a little old, but does the community
> have any feedback on the feasibility of this?
>
> On Friday, May 16, 2014 10:21:53 AM UTC-4, Tom wrote:
>
> > +1 fuzziness would be great when using cross\_fields
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, 7. Mai 2014 22:00:25 UTC+2 schrieb Ryan Tanner:
> >
> > > Any update to this?
> > >
> > > On Monday, April 7, 2014 7:59:54 AM UTC-6, Elliott Bradshaw wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Elasticsearch,
> > > >
> > > > I've been playing with the new cross\_fields multi match type, and I've
> > > > got to say that I love it. It's a great way to search complex data without
> > > > doing a lot of memory killing denormalization. That said, is there any
> > > > plan to implement a fuzziness option with this type? That would certainly
> > > > be very valuable.
> > > >
> > > > - Elliott
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com](mailto:elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com).
To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/abe1f33a-554a-4588-9e69-7d74d6329486%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/abe1f33a-554a-4588-9e69-7d74d6329486%40googlegroups.com).
For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout).
---
### Author:  [@system](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/system)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2017, 1:14am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cross-fields-w-fuzziness/16846/8 "2017-07-06T01:14:55Z")