# Range Filter slower then no range query (full scan) **URL:** \ **Category:** Elasticsearch\ **Created:** [November 26, 2013, 7:22am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/range-filter-slower-then-no-range-query-full-scan/14594 "2013-11-26T07:22:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![zuhaib\_2](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/zuhaib_2/32/1896_2.png) [@zuhaib\_2](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/zuhaib_2)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2013, 7:22am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/range-filter-slower-then-no-range-query-full-scan/14594/1 "2013-11-26T07:22:17Z")
Hey, So we have a query like the following: { "sort": { "date.untouched": "desc" }, "query": { "constant\_score": { "filter": { "bool": { "must": [ { "range": { "\_cache": false, "date.untouched": { "gte": "2012-10-16T18:33:42Z", "lte": "2013-11-10T05:31:15Z" } } }, [ { "term": { "\_cache": false, "foo.id": 1 } }, { "term": { "bar.id": 1, "\_cache": false } } ] ] } } } }, "size": 75 } and we are seeing responses back that take something like this: { "took" : 1334, "timed\_out" : false, "\_shards" : { "total" : 8, "successful" : 8, "failed" : 0 }, "hits" : { "total" : 8138, "max\_score" : null, "hits" : [ { ... Now if I drop the range query: { "sort": { "date.untouched": "desc" }, "query": { "constant\_score": { "filter": { "bool": { "must": [ [ { "term": { "\_cache": false, "foo.id": 1 } }, { "term": { "bar.id": 1, "\_cache": false } } ] ] } } } }, "size": 75 } It returns results super fast { "took" : 53, "timed\_out" : false, "\_shards" : { "total" : 8, "successful" : 8, "failed" : 0 }, "hits" : { "total" : 7257, "max\_score" : null, "hits" : [ { ... Now what are we doing wrong with the range filter or is this just the expected performance with it. A little info on our setup, this is against a single index (for the testing I used different index each time to prevent hitting cache results) and we have filter cache disabled because of the heap memory needed for it. We have enabled filter cache in the past (for small testing) and it seems to make little difference. We split the index by time (index-2013.11, index-2013.10 etc) and if the range is smaller (say just a day) its also pretty quick. But if the range is a large date gap it seems to slow everything down. Any idea? Thanks Zuhaib -- 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:** ![jpountz](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/jpountz/32/45836_2.png) [@jpountz](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/jpountz)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2013, 9:08am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/range-filter-slower-then-no-range-query-full-scan/14594/2 "2013-11-26T09:08:03Z")
For large gaps, the numeric range filter usually performs better than the range filter. Please however note that it works on top of field data, so Elasticsearch will need to load all your date values into memory. [1] [http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/query-dsl-numeric-range-filter.html](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/query-dsl-numeric-range-filter.html) -- Adrien Grand -- 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:** ![zuhaib\_2](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/zuhaib_2/32/1896_2.png) [@zuhaib\_2](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/zuhaib_2)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2013, 12:43am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/range-filter-slower-then-no-range-query-full-scan/14594/3 "2013-11-27T00:43:35Z")
Thanks for the suggestion Adrien but a few issues for us, first the range field for us is a string (its a date but we store it as a string) so we can use the current numeric range. According to that page they are removing numeric range and adding a execution option can you can do fielddata. I wonder if that will work with string ranges? Need to check out 0.90.8 to confirm but looks like its still not released it. Thanks again Zuhaib On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Adrien Grand \< [adrien.grand@elasticsearch.com](mailto:adrien.grand@elasticsearch.com)\> wrote: > For large gaps, the numeric range filter usually performs better than the > range filter. Please however note that it works on top of field data, so > Elasticsearch will need to load all your date values into memory. > > [1] > [Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale | Elastic](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/query-dsl-numeric-range-filter.html) > > -- > Adrien Grand > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "elasticsearch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > [https://groups.google.com/d/topic/elasticsearch/uqb1jA0kMQw/unsubscribe](https://groups.google.com/d/topic/elasticsearch/uqb1jA0kMQw/unsubscribe). > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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). To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CALWC%3DND-daUf%2BiwBz3f2vpUQe7r-SvdaUvYZEnhPv%3DXvZ7urxQ%40mail.gmail.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CALWC%3DND-daUf%2BiwBz3f2vpUQe7r-SvdaUvYZEnhPv%3DXvZ7urxQ%40mail.gmail.com). For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/groups/opt\_out](https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out). ---
**Author:** ![zuhaib\_2](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/zuhaib_2/32/1896_2.png) [@zuhaib\_2](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/zuhaib_2)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2013, 12:41am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/range-filter-slower-then-no-range-query-full-scan/14594/4 "2013-12-03T00:41:28Z")
Just an update, it seems the changes in 0.90.8 are just a renaming of of numeric\_range filter to fielddata and it still has the same constraint (it must be a numeric). I open a bug ticket that fielddate range filter should work on non-numeric type, [https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/issues/4318](https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/issues/4318) -- 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/bf176313-dd3a-48b3-9435-0f27e2ea6a60%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/bf176313-dd3a-48b3-9435-0f27e2ea6a60%40googlegroups.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, 2:03am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/range-filter-slower-then-no-range-query-full-scan/14594/5 "2017-07-06T02:03:45Z")