Multi-match query
The multi_match
query builds on the match
query to allow multi-field queries:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query": "this is a test",
"fields": [ "subject", "message" ]
}
}
}
The query string. | |
The fields to be queried. |
fields
and per-field boosting
Fields can be specified with wildcards, eg:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query": "Will Smith",
"fields": [ "title", "*_name" ]
}
}
}
Query the |
Individual fields can be boosted with the caret (^
) notation:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query" : "this is a test",
"fields" : [ "subject^3", "message" ]
}
}
}
The |
If no fields
are provided, the multi_match
query defaults to the index.query.default_field
index settings, which in turn defaults to *
. *
extracts all fields in the mapping that are eligible to term queries and filters the metadata fields. All extracted fields are then combined to build a query.
There is a limit on the number of fields that can be queried at once. It is defined by the indices.query.bool.max_clause_count
Search settings which defaults to 1024.
Types of multi_match
query:
The way the multi_match
query is executed internally depends on the type
parameter, which can be set to:
| (default) Finds documents which match any field, but uses the |
| Finds documents which match any field and combines the |
| Treats fields with the same |
| Runs a |
| Runs a |
| Creates a |
best_fields
The best_fields
type is most useful when you are searching for multiple words best found in the same field. For instance “brown fox” in a single field is more meaningful than “brown” in one field and “fox” in the other.
The best_fields
type generates a match
query for each field and wraps them in a dis_max
query, to find the single best matching field. For instance, this query:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query": "brown fox",
"type": "best_fields",
"fields": [ "subject", "message" ],
"tie_breaker": 0.3
}
}
}
would be executed as:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"dis_max": {
"queries": [
{ "match": { "subject": "brown fox" }},
{ "match": { "message": "brown fox" }}
],
"tie_breaker": 0.3
}
}
}
Normally the best_fields
type uses the score of the single best matching field, but if tie_breaker
is specified, then it calculates the score as follows:
- the score from the best matching field
- plus
tie_breaker * _score
for all other matching fields
Also, accepts analyzer
, boost
, operator
, minimum_should_match
, fuzziness
, lenient
, prefix_length
, max_expansions
, fuzzy_rewrite
, zero_terms_query
, cutoff_frequency
, auto_generate_synonyms_phrase_query
and fuzzy_transpositions
, as explained in match query.
operator
and minimum_should_match
The best_fields
and most_fields
types are field-centric — they generate a match
query per field. This means that the operator
and minimum_should_match
parameters are applied to each field individually, which is probably not what you want.
Take this query for example:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query": "Will Smith",
"type": "best_fields",
"fields": [ "first_name", "last_name" ],
"operator": "and"
}
}
}
All terms must be present. |
This query is executed as:
(+first_name:will +first_name:smith)
| (+last_name:will +last_name:smith)
In other words, all terms must be present in a single field for a document to match.
See cross_fields
for a better solution.
most_fields
The most_fields
type is most useful when querying multiple fields that contain the same text analyzed in different ways. For instance, the main field may contain synonyms, stemming and terms without diacritics. A second field may contain the original terms, and a third field might contain shingles. By combining scores from all three fields we can match as many documents as possible with the main field, but use the second and third fields to push the most similar results to the top of the list.
This query:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query": "quick brown fox",
"type": "most_fields",
"fields": [ "title", "title.original", "title.shingles" ]
}
}
}
would be executed as:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"should": [
{ "match": { "title": "quick brown fox" }},
{ "match": { "title.original": "quick brown fox" }},
{ "match": { "title.shingles": "quick brown fox" }}
]
}
}
}
The score from each match
clause is added together, then divided by the number of match
clauses.
Also, accepts analyzer
, boost
, operator
, minimum_should_match
, fuzziness
, lenient
, prefix_length
, max_expansions
, fuzzy_rewrite
, zero_terms_query
and cutoff_frequency
, as explained in match query, but see operator
and minimum_should_match
.
phrase
and phrase_prefix
The phrase
and phrase_prefix
types behave just like best_fields
, but they use a match_phrase
or match_phrase_prefix
query instead of a match
query.
This query:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query": "quick brown f",
"type": "phrase_prefix",
"fields": [ "subject", "message" ]
}
}
}
would be executed as:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"dis_max": {
"queries": [
{ "match_phrase_prefix": { "subject": "quick brown f" }},
{ "match_phrase_prefix": { "message": "quick brown f" }}
]
}
}
}
Also, accepts analyzer
, boost
, lenient
and zero_terms_query
as explained in Match, as well as slop
which is explained in Match phrase. Type phrase_prefix
additionally accepts max_expansions
.
phrase
, phrase_prefix
and fuzziness
The fuzziness
parameter cannot be used with the phrase
or phrase_prefix
type.
cross_fields
The cross_fields
type is particularly useful with structured documents where multiple fields should match. For instance, when querying the first_name
and last_name
fields for “Will Smith”, the best match is likely to have “Will” in one field and “Smith” in the other.
This sounds like a job for most_fields
but there are two problems with that approach. The first problem is that operator
and minimum_should_match
are applied per-field, instead of per-term (see explanation above).
The second problem is to do with relevance: the different term frequencies in the first_name
and last_name
fields can produce unexpected results.
For instance, imagine we have two people: “Will Smith” and “Smith Jones”. “Smith” as a last name is very common (and so is of low importance) but “Smith” as a first name is very uncommon (and so is of great importance).
If we do a search for “Will Smith”, the “Smith Jones” document will probably appear above the better matching “Will Smith” because the score of first_name:smith
has trumped the combined scores of first_name:will
plus last_name:smith
.
One way of dealing with these types of queries is simply to index the first_name
and last_name
fields into a single full_name
field. Of course, this can only be done at index time.
The cross_field
type tries to solve these problems at query time by taking a term-centric approach. It first analyzes the query string into individual terms, then looks for each term in any of the fields, as though they were one big field.
A query like:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query": "Will Smith",
"type": "cross_fields",
"fields": [ "first_name", "last_name" ],
"operator": "and"
}
}
}
is executed as:
+(first_name:will last_name:will)
+(first_name:smith last_name:smith)
In other words, all terms must be present in at least one field for a document to match. (Compare this to the logic used for best_fields
and most_fields
.)
That solves one of the two problems. The problem of differing term frequencies is solved by blending the term frequencies for all fields in order to even out the differences.
In practice, first_name:smith
will be treated as though it has the same frequencies as last_name:smith
, plus one. This will make matches on first_name
and last_name
have comparable scores, with a tiny advantage for last_name
since it is the most likely field that contains smith
.
Note that cross_fields
is usually only useful on short string fields that all have a boost
of 1
. Otherwise boosts, term freqs and length normalization contribute to the score in such a way that the blending of term statistics is not meaningful anymore.
If you run the above query through the Validate API, it returns this explanation:
+blended("will", fields: [first_name, last_name])
+blended("smith", fields: [first_name, last_name])
Also, accepts analyzer
, boost
, operator
, minimum_should_match
, lenient
, zero_terms_query
and cutoff_frequency
, as explained in match query.
cross_field
and analysis
The cross_field
type can only work in term-centric mode on fields that have the same analyzer. Fields with the same analyzer are grouped together as in the example above. If there are multiple groups, they are combined with a bool
query.
For instance, if we have a first
and last
field which have the same analyzer, plus a first.edge
and last.edge
which both use an edge_ngram
analyzer, this query:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query": "Jon",
"type": "cross_fields",
"fields": [
"first", "first.edge",
"last", "last.edge"
]
}
}
}
would be executed as:
blended("jon", fields: [first, last])
| (
blended("j", fields: [first.edge, last.edge])
blended("jo", fields: [first.edge, last.edge])
blended("jon", fields: [first.edge, last.edge])
)
In other words, first
and last
would be grouped together and treated as a single field, and first.edge
and last.edge
would be grouped together and treated as a single field.
Having multiple groups is fine, but when combined with operator
or minimum_should_match
, it can suffer from the same problem as most_fields
or best_fields
.
You can easily rewrite this query yourself as two separate cross_fields
queries combined with a bool
query, and apply the minimum_should_match
parameter to just one of them:
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"should": [
{
"multi_match" : {
"query": "Will Smith",
"type": "cross_fields",
"fields": [ "first", "last" ],
"minimum_should_match": "50%"
}
},
{
"multi_match" : {
"query": "Will Smith",
"type": "cross_fields",
"fields": [ "*.edge" ]
}
}
]
}
}
}
Either |
You can force all fields into the same group by specifying the analyzer
parameter in the query.
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query": "Jon",
"type": "cross_fields",
"analyzer": "standard",
"fields": [ "first", "last", "*.edge" ]
}
}
}
Use the |
which will be executed as:
blended("will", fields: [first, first.edge, last.edge, last])
blended("smith", fields: [first, first.edge, last.edge, last])
tie_breaker
By default, each per-term blended
query will use the best score returned by any field in a group, then these scores are added together to give the final score. The tie_breaker
parameter can change the default behaviour of the per-term blended
queries. It accepts:
| Take the single best score out of (eg) |
| Add together the scores for (eg) |
| Take the single best score plus |
cross_fields
and fuzziness
The fuzziness
parameter cannot be used with the cross_fields
type.
bool_prefix
The bool_prefix
type’s scoring behaves like most_fields
, but using a match_bool_prefix
query instead of a match
query.
GET /_search
{
"query": {
"multi_match" : {
"query": "quick brown f",
"type": "bool_prefix",
"fields": [ "subject", "message" ]
}
}
}
The analyzer
, boost
, operator
, minimum_should_match
, lenient
, zero_terms_query
, and auto_generate_synonyms_phrase_query
parameters as explained in match query are supported. The fuzziness
, prefix_length
, max_expansions
, fuzzy_rewrite
, and fuzzy_transpositions
parameters are supported for the terms that are used to construct term queries, but do not have an effect on the prefix query constructed from the final term.
The slop
and cutoff_frequency
parameters are not supported by this query type.