# Different Results Based on Aggregation Size **URL:** \ **Category:** Kibana\ **Created:** [July 22, 2016, 6:23pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/different-results-based-on-aggregation-size/56202 "2016-07-22T18:23:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Shane\_Daniel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Shane\_Daniel](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Shane_Daniel)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2016, 6:23pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/different-results-based-on-aggregation-size/56202/1 "2016-07-22T18:23:19Z")
I'm getting different results depending on selected _Size_. Steps to reproduce in Kibana: 1. Create vertical bar chart 2. metrics \> Y-Axis \> Aggregation: Average 3. metrics \> Y-Axis \> Field: select a numerical field 4. buckets \> X-Axis \> Aggregation: Terms 5. buckets \> X-Axis \> Field: select a string field 6. buckets \> X-Axis \> Order by: select metric: Average 7. buckets \> X-Axis \> Order: Descending 8. buckets \> X-Axis \> Size: 10 For my data the first bar has a value of 1,918.84. It is using a document count of 5 to calculate this result. If I change _buckets \> X-Axis \> Size_: 30, the first bar has a value of 1,373.61. It is using a document count of 7 to calculate this result. If I change _buckets \> X-Axis \> Size_: 0, the first bar has a value of 962.51. It is using a document count of 10 to calculate this result. I believe this to be the correct value. There are 10 documents with the value associated with the first bar, and a total count of 13,902 in total document Hits. I'm concerned as the returned values are quite inaccurate, and I cannot set Size: 0 as there are too many bars. Is there a recommended solution? ---
**Author:** ![BigFunger](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/bigfunger/32/7323_2.png) [@BigFunger](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/BigFunger)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2016, 7:30pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/different-results-based-on-aggregation-size/56202/2 "2016-07-22T19:30:17Z")
Can you provide me with a sample of your data with which I can reproduce this problem? ---
**Author:** ![Shane\_Daniel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Shane\_Daniel](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Shane_Daniel)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2016, 8:02pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/different-results-based-on-aggregation-size/56202/3 "2016-07-22T20:02:23Z")
Thanks for the response Jim. Unfortunately I can't share the particular data set I'm working with. I tried to create a similar scenario using [http://demo.elastic.co/packetbeat](http://demo.elastic.co/packetbeat) Time filter: From: 2016-07-21 23:00:00.000 To: 2016-07-22 00:00:59.999 Create vertical bar chart (index: packetbeat-\*) metrics \> Y-Axis \> Aggregation: Average metrics \> Y-Axis \> Field: responsetime metrics \> +Add metric metrics \> Y-Axis (2) \> Aggregation: Count buckets \> X-Axis \> Aggregation: Terms buckets \> X-Axis \> Field: query buckets \> X-Axis \> Order: Top buckets \> X-Axis \> Size: 3 buckets \> X-Axis \> Order By: metric: Average responsetime Here the first bar, test.users.find() has a count of 8 and an avg responsetime of 91.125. Also the third bar, "GET /static/img/paper\_fibers.png HTTP/1.1" has a count of 1 and an avg responsetime of 59. Changing, buckets \> X-Axis \> Size: 100 Now test.users.find() has a count of 9 and an avg responsetime of 84.667. Also, "GET /static/img/paper\_fibers.png HTTP/1.1" now has a count of 2 and an avg responsetime of 44.5 ---
**Author:** ![BigFunger](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/bigfunger/32/7323_2.png) [@BigFunger](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/BigFunger)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2016, 7:30pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/different-results-based-on-aggregation-size/56202/4 "2016-07-26T19:30:47Z")
@Shane_Daniel, I agree that the results that you mentioned do sound suspect, and would like to investigate it further, but need to be able to reproduce the issue. I tried to recreate what you described above. I assume it's because the demo data changed since you set this up. (see image to make sure I didn't screw anything up) ![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/2X/f/fdd9f2a9fd23b7b5f409787048d34e43e5805b72.png) ---
**Author:** ![Shane\_Daniel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Shane\_Daniel](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Shane_Daniel)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2016, 8:46pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/different-results-based-on-aggregation-size/56202/5 "2016-07-26T20:46:42Z")
@BigFunger, Yes, it looks like the data I used in the example has been purged. I was able to resolve my issue by setting X-Axis \> JSON Input \> {"shard\_size":0} For other readers information the description of the shard\_size parameter can be found here: [https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/search-aggregations-bucket-terms-aggregation.html#\_shard\_size\_2](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/search-aggregations-bucket-terms-aggregation.html#_shard_size_2) ---
**Author:** ![BigFunger](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/bigfunger/32/7323_2.png) [@BigFunger](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/BigFunger)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2016, 8:49pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/different-results-based-on-aggregation-size/56202/6 "2016-07-26T20:49:04Z")
@Shane_Daniel, Thanks for posting your solution! Wish I could have been more help. ---
**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, 1:43pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/different-results-based-on-aggregation-size/56202/7 "2017-07-06T13:43:39Z")