# Implicit match all when using not filters **URL:** \ **Category:** Elasticsearch\ **Created:** [April 4, 2013, 5:56pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/implicit-match-all-when-using-not-filters/11454 "2013-04-04T17:56:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Ivan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/df788c/32.png) [@Ivan](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Ivan)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2013, 5:56pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/implicit-match-all-when-using-not-filters/11454/1 "2013-04-04T17:56:12Z")
Besides working on projects using ElasticSearch, I am still using on Lucene as well. One limitation of Lucene is that a query or sub-query cannot continue only NOT clauses. The common workaround is to ask for everything _:_ when using a NOT clause. I believe ElasticSearch does this automatically when using NOT clauses. I am looking to borrow _cough_steal_cough_ some ideas, but I can't figure where exactly in the code this magic is happening. Anyone have any ideas where it could be? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Cheers, Ivan -- 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). For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/groups/opt\_out](https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out). ---
**Author:** ![Igor\_Motov](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/igor_motov/32/45193_2.png) [@Igor\_Motov](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Igor_Motov)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2013, 1:51pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/implicit-match-all-when-using-not-filters/11454/2 "2013-04-05T13:51:31Z")
> On Thursday, April 4, 2013 1:56:12 PM UTC-4, Ivan Brusic wrote: > Besides working on projects using Elasticsearch, I am still using on > Lucene as well. One limitation of Lucene is that a query or sub-query > cannot continue only NOT clauses. The common workaround is to ask for > everything _:_ when using a NOT clause. > > I believe Elasticsearch does this automatically when using NOT clauses. I > am looking to borrow _cough_steal_cough_ some ideas, but I can't figure > where exactly in the code this magic is happening. Anyone have any ideas > where it could be? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. > > Cheers, > > Ivan -- 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). For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/groups/opt\_out](https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out). ---
**Author:** ![Ivan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/df788c/32.png) [@Ivan](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Ivan)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2013, 4:39pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/implicit-match-all-when-using-not-filters/11454/3 "2013-04-05T16:39:08Z")
Thanks so much. I was looking in the Builder classes, while the call was in the parser instead. I knew I would learn something. My code is pretty much identical, except I didn't know about the existence of isProhibited(). Not sure how I missed it after many years of using Lucene. -- Ivan On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Igor Motov [imotov@gmail.com](mailto:imotov@gmail.com) wrote: > [https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/blob/4eefcb9c82778e8cd7a0126b98872cf08740c46e/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/common/lucene/search/Queries.java#L103](https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/blob/4eefcb9c82778e8cd7a0126b98872cf08740c46e/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/common/lucene/search/Queries.java#L103) > > On Thursday, April 4, 2013 1:56:12 PM UTC-4, Ivan Brusic wrote: > > > Besides working on projects using Elasticsearch, I am still using on > > Lucene as well. One limitation of Lucene is that a query or sub-query > > cannot continue only NOT clauses. The common workaround is to ask for > > everything _:_ when using a NOT clause. > > > > I believe Elasticsearch does this automatically when using NOT clauses. I > > am looking to borrow _cough_steal_cough_ some ideas, but I can't figure > > where exactly in the code this magic is happening. Anyone have any ideas > > where it could be? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Ivan > > > > -- > > 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). > > For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/groups/opt\_out](https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out). -- 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). For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/groups/opt\_out](https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out). ---
**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, 2:42am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/implicit-match-all-when-using-not-filters/11454/4 "2017-07-06T02:42:35Z")