Hi All,
I am currently evaluating the migration from Elasticsearch to Opensearch.
Currently we use geo_shape, but the geo features we index are all points.
This means we could also use geo_point.
Many years ago, we have decided to use geo_shape as geo_point was having some issues when using aggregations.
See this post:
Now, i remeber that something changed for geo_point at some version of Elasticsearch.
So i guess my question is:
Is geo_point still stored just as two numbers on the index or is it stored as terms?
It seems that there is a difference in storage
green open track_202411 ttAOVMiSTCWdTXwR5Gi-mw 6 0 1609882 0 391.2mb 391.2mb
green open geo_track_202411 9sAoPRUjQsOJQC6f1ueacA 6 0 1609882 0 304.1mb 304.1mb
As you can see (after _forcemerge) we have 304 MB for geo_point and 391MB for geo_shape for the same number of documents (same documents actually) which is 25% less storage.
I would love to save some disk space, but if geo_point is bahaving in the same old way, of loading all documents in memory just to check if they are inside a polygon, this will be a hard no for the geo_point.
Thanks in advance
/Georgi