Non-aggregate workarounds


(Lyle Hubbard) #1

so I've been having some pretty massive difficulty with this. Here is the json format of what im visualizing

"properties": {
    "id" { "type" : "text" }, 
    "nested_map" : { "type" :  "nested"}  
}

where the nested object contains the name of the process and the double of its rate, i.e.

{ "name" : {
    "type": "text" },
"rate": {
  "type" :  "double"
  }
} 

I want to be able to display, per process name, the associated rate. x-axis is term, y-axis is the actual value corresponding to that term. It looks like aggregation is the only visualization that is supported. This sucks. Am I able to work around this somehow?


(Bhavya R M) #2

Hi,

Can you please post a couple of sample documents and your mapping?
I am pretty sure we do not support this yet. But would like to confirm.

Thanks,
Bhavya


(Bhavya R M) #3

Can you also please take a look at this discuss post? Workaround for nested objects

Thanks,
Bhavya


(Lyle Hubbard) #4

I have tried many mappings in order to work around this, but none worked. default mappings are
{EID : [{ "sId" : { "type" : "text" }, "process" : { "type" : "text"} }] }

That said, I did create an alternative version that was suggested through the explicit mapping page,
{EID : { "type" : "nested" } }. Both didn't work


(Lyle Hubbard) #5

I think kibana would be very helpful for lay-users if it supported a form of optional non-aggregate visualization, because then dashboards can be created on the fly on a per usecase demand


(Bhavya R M) #6

Hi,

Yep. We have an existing bug: https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/1084. Can you please subscribe to it for updates and comment with your usecase .

Thanks,
Bhavya


(Lyle Hubbard) #7

This is the lookup for the associated integers used in the sum buckets. {EID : [{ "process" : "text", "howfast" : "integer" }] } OR it could be {EID: { "processName" : "number" } } and then for each process name, it could have its own number. I think that is similar to the suggestion in the link you provided. I could hypothetically smash the two json together and then see if the objects sharing the "sId" parameter would be a way of associating them. I will give that a shot and let you know how it goes.


(system) #8

This topic was automatically closed 28 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.