Repository navigation
Conversation
Closes quickwit-oss#3696 Signed-off-by: YuuGR1337 <[email protected]>
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: e348bf0d91
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
| - [Distributed tracing](https://quickwit.io/docs/distributed-tracing/overview) | ||
| - Metrics support is on the roadmap | ||
|
|
||
| > **Note:** Since Quickwit 0.6, the dynamic mapping default tokenizer changed from `default` to `raw`. Update examples/tutorials (e.g. [ingest API](https://quickwit.io/docs/ingest-data/ingest-api)) accordingly. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Update the affected tutorials instead of adding a warning
For users following the local-file tutorial on Quickwit 0.6+, this warning does not fix the broken example: docs/ingest-data/ingest-local-file.md:33-34 still creates a dynamic index without overriding the new raw tokenizer, and line 69 then demonstrates a multi-word full-text query. Because raw indexes the whole string as one token, that query cannot match individual words in Stack Overflow text; add dynamic_mapping.tokenizer: default to this and the other affected full-text examples rather than asking README readers to update the tutorials themselves.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
Fixes #3696