# Index-time boosting a not\_analyzed field **URL:** \ **Category:** Elasticsearch\ **Created:** [November 13, 2013, 3:38pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/index-time-boosting-a-not-analyzed-field/14385 "2013-11-13T15:38:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Matt\_Hanson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d2c977/32.png) [@Matt\_Hanson](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Matt_Hanson)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2013, 3:38pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/index-time-boosting-a-not-analyzed-field/14385/1 "2013-11-13T15:38:50Z")
I'm currently looking to upgrade from ES 0.19.8 to 0.90.7 and I'm having an issue with a bit of code that used to work when trying to store a document with an index-time boost. I think I've managed to distil the issue down to some reproducible steps that works on 0.19.8 but not on 0.90.7: Against 0.19.8: [http://pastebin.com/a3qcSzwt](http://pastebin.com/a3qcSzwt) And the same against 0.90.7: [http://pastebin.com/gUqL35qx](http://pastebin.com/gUqL35qx) As you can see, the index creation sets the field 'boostable\_str' with index as not\_analyzed and omit\_norms to false which I believe should mean it is indexed and doesn't omit norms yet the exception states that one of those conditions is not being met. The mapping check shows in the newer version of ES that omit\_norms is true, not false which is what should have been configured. We specifically need the field set to not\_analyzed as we're using it for faceting and exact matching so we need the literal, un-analyzed values. Am I missing something fundamental in what I'm asking ES to do now (which has historically worked for us) or is there a bug? -- 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:** [November 13, 2013, 8:32pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/index-time-boosting-a-not-analyzed-field/14385/2 "2013-11-13T20:32:48Z")
The default index\_options for not\_analyzed fields is "docs", as the output can confirm. Try changing it to "freqs" on fields that need to be boosted. > **[Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale](https://www.elastic.co)** > > Power insights and outcomes with the Elasticsearch Platform and AI. See into your data and find answers that matter with enterprise solutions designed to help you build, observe, and protect. Try Elasticsearch free today. On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:38 AM, Matt Hanson \< [matthew.hanson@predictiveintent.com](mailto:matthew.hanson@predictiveintent.com)\> wrote: > I'm currently looking to upgrade from ES 0.19.8 to 0.90.7 and I'm having > an issue with a bit of code that used to work when trying to store a > document with an index-time boost. > > I think I've managed to distil the issue down to some reproducible steps > that works on 0.19.8 but not on 0.90.7: > > Against 0.19.8: [$ curl -XPOST localhost:9200/test -d '{"mappings": {"BOOSTER": {"properties": {" - Pastebin.com](http://pastebin.com/a3qcSzwt) > > And the same against 0.90.7: [$ curl -XPOST localhost:9200/test -d '{"mappings": {"BOOSTER": {"properties": {" - Pastebin.com](http://pastebin.com/gUqL35qx) > > As you can see, the index creation sets the field 'boostable\_str' with > index as not\_analyzed and omit\_norms to false which I believe should mean > it is indexed and doesn't omit norms yet the exception states that one of > those conditions is not being met. The mapping check shows in the newer > version of ES that omit\_norms is true, not false which is what should have > been configured. > > We specifically need the field set to not\_analyzed as we're using it for > faceting and exact matching so we need the literal, un-analyzed values. > > Am I missing something fundamental in what I'm asking ES to do now (which > has historically worked for us) or is there a bug? > > -- > 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, 2:07am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/index-time-boosting-a-not-analyzed-field/14385/3 "2017-07-06T02:07:23Z")