Skip to content

Conversation

@dwdougherty
Copy link
Collaborator

@dwdougherty dwdougherty commented Jul 10, 2025

DOC-5459

The first commit is my first pass to re-organize the search index content. I'm looking for comments on the overall structure and ordering of the content. Some content was moved from "Search concepts" to "Indexing". This is a draft PR. I will convert to a real PR and open up reviews to the rest of the team after initial comments by @mich-elle-luna and/or @andy-stark-redis.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Staging links:
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/commands/ft.create
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/commands/ft.tagvals
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/advanced-concepts/query_syntax
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/indexing/
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/indexing/field-and-type-options
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/indexing/geospatial
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/indexing/hash-indexing
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/indexing/json-arrays
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/indexing/json-indexing
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/indexing/search-techniques
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/indexing/tags
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/indexing/tokenization
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/ai/search-and-query/indexing/vector-indexing
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/clients/dotnet/vecsearch
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/clients/go/vecsearch
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/clients/jedis/vecsearch
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/clients/nodejs/vecsearch
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/clients/patterns/indexes/
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/clients/php/vecsearch
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/clients/redis-py/vecsearch
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/data-types/geospatial
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/develop/whats-new/
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/operate/oss_and_stack/stack-with-enterprise/release-notes/redisearch/redisearch-2.0-release-notes
https://redis.io/docs/staging/DOC-5459/operate/oss_and_stack/stack-with-enterprise/search/scalable-query-best-practices

@dwdougherty dwdougherty marked this pull request as draft July 10, 2025 18:19
@dwdougherty dwdougherty changed the title DEV: restructure indexing content (first pass) DEV: restructure indexing content Jul 10, 2025
@andy-stark-redis
Copy link
Contributor

@dwdougherty This is definitely a good exploration of what we might do, but if we're going to do this much surgery on the RQE docs then we might have some opportunities to simplify things quite a bit more. For example, in the version in this PR, we still suffer from some of those issues that afflict the current docs (eg, indexing page has lists of field types with links, then Field and Type Options has a slightly more detailed list, also with links...) Also, we seem to have lost some useful stuff here (eg, current live geo indexing page has some code examples, and the geo concepts page has a diagram and some simplified examples to demonstrate the set-theoretic options for GEOSHAPE).

It's handy to have a working PR available, but I'm thinking we might take a higher-level view of this before changing a lot of content. I've got an idea for this that I'll share separately.

@dwdougherty
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Since nobody is particularly enthusiastic about this PR, I'm going to close it. I have a backup of the modified content in case we want to pursue some of this.

@dwdougherty dwdougherty deleted the DOC-5459 branch July 24, 2025 18:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants