- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.5k
Mark Token Pruning for Sparse Vector as GA #128854
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
markjhoy merged 8 commits into elastic:main from markjhoy:markjhoy/mark_token_pruning_ga Jun 24, 2025
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
caf464d
remove [preview] labels sparse vec / token pruning
markjhoy c7fac1e
Update docs/changelog/128854.yaml
markjhoy 188e0da
update changelog
markjhoy c18afd8
set changelog to feature/ml
markjhoy d58d441
set proper area
markjhoy 29195cf
add applies_to labels
markjhoy 41b8c39
Merge branch 'main' into markjhoy/mark_token_pruning_ga
markjhoy d14cb0b
add clarification for token pruning behaviour
markjhoy File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters. Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ | ||
pr: 128854 | ||
summary: Mark token pruning for sparse vector as GA | ||
area: Machine Learning | ||
type: feature | ||
issues: [] | ||
highlight: | ||
title: Mark Token Pruning for Sparse Vector as GA | ||
body: |- | ||
Token pruning for sparse_vector queries has been live since 8.13 as tech preview. | ||
As of 8.19.0 and 9.1.0, this is now generally available. | ||
notable: true |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters. Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit. This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code. Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed. Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes. Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch. Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit. Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported. You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion. Outdated suggestions cannot be applied. This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved. Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews. Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments. Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge. Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wait, we're not shipping this to 9.0.x right? This seems wrong?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this tag just makes sure to specify that this was in preview for 9.0.x, but now GA for 9.1... @leemthompo - this was your suggestion from earlier - is my understanding correct? Or should the
preview 9.0
part just be removed?Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But then it would be when it was released which was prior to 9.0? Or since these docs are 9.0+ only? This is really confusing as a docs structure, sorry :(
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good question - I'll defer to @leemthompo as he suggested that tag ;)
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yup the the 9.x docs don't talk about 8.x and below in the applies_to metadata. So yeah it doesn't mean "this feature was added in 9.0 in tech preview", it just means "This feature was tech preview in 9.0".
The actual output on the page will have more helpful tooltips and stuff in the future, but yeah the raw metadata is a bit ambiguous. It's also hard to get used to the "cumulative docs" paradigm but we need it because this page applies to both 9.0 and 9.1 (and beyond as time goes on), so in order to specify when something went GA in 9.1, we need to also be able to specify it was preview in 9.0. Because there's no 9.0 page to switch back to.