{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elastic/elasticsearch/issues/11289","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elastic/elasticsearch/issues/11289/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elastic/elasticsearch/issues/11289/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elastic/elasticsearch/issues/11289/events","html_url":"https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/issues/11289","id":79167505,"number":11289,"title":"Aggregations: Add an `other` bucket to the `filter(s)` aggregation","user":{"login":"jpountz","id":299848,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/299848?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jpountz","html_url":"https://github.com/jpountz","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jpountz/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jpountz/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jpountz/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jpountz/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jpountz/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jpountz/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jpountz/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jpountz/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jpountz/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elastic/elasticsearch/labels/:Aggregations","name":":Aggregations","color":"009800"},{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elastic/elasticsearch/labels/adoptme","name":"adoptme","color":"207de5"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2015-05-21T21:26:04Z","updated_at":"2015-05-21T21:26:04Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Spin-off from #5324. While we still need to figure the API, it should be easy to compute an `other` bucket for the `filters` aggregation. We probably wouldn't even need an option and could just compute it all the time, it should be fairly cheap.\r\n\r\nAnother virtue I can see in that feature is that it would encourage to use query filters instead of aggregation filters if the `other` part is not of interest, which is more efficient."}}