This change adapts the serialization checks to 7.7.0 in order to cope with #53659.
Note that this commit also disables the bwc tests temporarily in order to be able to
merge #53659 first.

Relates #51852

This commit, built on top of #51708, allows to modify shard search requests based on informations collected on other shards. It is intended to speed up sorted queries on time-based indices. For queries that are only interested in the top documents.

This change will rewrite the shard queries to match none if the bottom sort value computed in prior shards is better than all values in the shard.
For queries that mix top documents and aggregations this change will reset the size of the top documents to 0 instead of rewriting to match none.
This means that we don't need to keep a search context open for this shard since we know in advance that it doesn't contain any competitive hit.

This commit disables the sort optimization added in elastic#51852 for scroll requests.
Scroll queries keep a state per shard so we cannot modify the request on
the first round (submit).
This bug was introduced in non-released versions which is why this pr
is marked as a non-issue.

This commit disables the sort optimization added in #51852 for scroll requests.
Scroll queries keep a state per shard so we cannot modify the request on
the first round (submit).
This bug was introduced in non-released versions which is why this pr
is marked as a non-issue.

This commit disables the sort optimization added in #51852 for scroll requests.
Scroll queries keep a state per shard so we cannot modify the request on
the first round (submit).
This bug was introduced in non-released versions which is why this pr
is marked as a non-issue.

Collapse search queries that sort by a field can throw
an ArrayStoreException due to a bug in the [sort optimization](elastic#51852)
introduced in 7.7.0. Search collapsing were not supposed to
be eligible for this sort optimization so this change explicitly
filters them from this new feature.

Collapse search queries that sort by a field can throw
an ArrayStoreException due to a bug in the [sort optimization](#51852)
introduced in 7.7.0. Search collapsing were not supposed to
be eligible for this sort optimization so this change explicitly
filters them from this new feature.

Collapse search queries that sort by a field can throw
an ArrayStoreException due to a bug in the [sort optimization](#51852)
introduced in 7.7.0. Search collapsing were not supposed to
be eligible for this sort optimization so this change explicitly
filters them from this new feature.

Collapse search queries that sort by a field can throw
an ArrayStoreException due to a bug in the [sort optimization](#51852)
introduced in 7.7.0. Search collapsing were not supposed to
be eligible for this sort optimization so this change explicitly
filters them from this new feature.

Whenever sorting on a date, numeric or keyword field (as primary sort), the can_match phase retrieves min and max for the field and sorts the shards (asc or desc depending on the sort order) so that they are going to be queried following that order. This allows incremental results to be exposed in that same order when using async search, as well as optimizations built on top of such behaviour (elastic#51852).

For fields with points we call `getMinPackedValue` and `getMaxPackedValue`, while for keyword fields we call `Terms#getMin` and `Terms#getMax`. Elasticsearch uses `FilterTerms` implementations to cancel queries as well as to track field usage. Such filter implementations should delegate their `getMin` and `getMax` calls to the wrapped `Terms` instance, which will leverage info from the block tree that caches min and max, otherwise they are always going to be retrieved from the index, which does I/O and slows the can_match phase down.

… and geonames tracks

We recently found a regression that affected searches sorted by keyword field (elastic/elasticsearch#92026).

Given that we had no benchmarks for sorting by keyword, this commit adds the relevant operations to the http-logs and geonames tracks.

Geonames is a good base but it's good to also make the new challenges part of the many-shards benchmarks as differences can be appreciated
with a high amount of shards involved in a query. This commit adds also specific challenges to verify the effect of elastic/elasticsearch#51852
when a search is sorted by numeric or timestamp.

Whenever sorting on a date, numeric or keyword field (as primary sort), the can_match phase retrieves min and max for the field and sorts the shards (asc or desc depending on the sort order) so that they are going to be queried following that order. This allows incremental results to be exposed in that same order when using async search, as well as optimizations built on top of such behaviour (#51852).

For fields with points we call `getMinPackedValue` and `getMaxPackedValue`, while for keyword fields we call `Terms#getMin` and `Terms#getMax`. Elasticsearch uses `FilterTerms` implementations to cancel queries as well as to track field usage. Such filter implementations should delegate their `getMin` and `getMax` calls to the wrapped `Terms` instance, which will leverage info from the block tree that caches min and max, otherwise they are always going to be retrieved from the index, which does I/O and slows the can_match phase down.

…#92026)

Whenever sorting on a date, numeric or keyword field (as primary sort), the can_match phase retrieves min and max for the field and sorts the shards (asc or desc depending on the sort order) so that they are going to be queried following that order. This allows incremental results to be exposed in that same order when using async search, as well as optimizations built on top of such behaviour (elastic#51852).

For fields with points we call `getMinPackedValue` and `getMaxPackedValue`, while for keyword fields we call `Terms#getMin` and `Terms#getMax`. Elasticsearch uses `FilterTerms` implementations to cancel queries as well as to track field usage. Such filter implementations should delegate their `getMin` and `getMax` calls to the wrapped `Terms` instance, which will leverage info from the block tree that caches min and max, otherwise they are always going to be retrieved from the index, which does I/O and slows the can_match phase down.

…#92854)

Whenever sorting on a date, numeric or keyword field (as primary sort), the can_match phase retrieves min and max for the field and sorts the shards (asc or desc depending on the sort order) so that they are going to be queried following that order. This allows incremental results to be exposed in that same order when using async search, as well as optimizations built on top of such behaviour (#51852).

For fields with points we call `getMinPackedValue` and `getMaxPackedValue`, while for keyword fields we call `Terms#getMin` and `Terms#getMax`. Elasticsearch uses `FilterTerms` implementations to cancel queries as well as to track field usage. Such filter implementations should delegate their `getMin` and `getMax` calls to the wrapped `Terms` instance, which will leverage info from the block tree that caches min and max, otherwise they are always going to be retrieved from the index, which does I/O and slows the can_match phase down.

…#92026)

Whenever sorting on a date, numeric or keyword field (as primary sort), the can_match phase retrieves min and max for the field and sorts the shards (asc or desc depending on the sort order) so that they are going to be queried following that order. This allows incremental results to be exposed in that same order when using async search, as well as optimizations built on top of such behaviour (elastic#51852).

For fields with points we call `getMinPackedValue` and `getMaxPackedValue`, while for keyword fields we call `Terms#getMin` and `Terms#getMax`. Elasticsearch uses `FilterTerms` implementations to cancel queries as well as to track field usage. Such filter implementations should delegate their `getMin` and `getMax` calls to the wrapped `Terms` instance, which will leverage info from the block tree that caches min and max, otherwise they are always going to be retrieved from the index, which does I/O and slows the can_match phase down.

…#92026)

Whenever sorting on a date, numeric or keyword field (as primary sort), the can_match phase retrieves min and max for the field and sorts the shards (asc or desc depending on the sort order) so that they are going to be queried following that order. This allows incremental results to be exposed in that same order when using async search, as well as optimizations built on top of such behaviour (elastic#51852).

For fields with points we call `getMinPackedValue` and `getMaxPackedValue`, while for keyword fields we call `Terms#getMin` and `Terms#getMax`. Elasticsearch uses `FilterTerms` implementations to cancel queries as well as to track field usage. Such filter implementations should delegate their `getMin` and `getMax` calls to the wrapped `Terms` instance, which will leverage info from the block tree that caches min and max, otherwise they are always going to be retrieved from the index, which does I/O and slows the can_match phase down.

Whenever sorting on a date, numeric or keyword field (as primary sort), the can_match phase retrieves min and max for the field and sorts the shards (asc or desc depending on the sort order) so that they are going to be queried following that order. This allows incremental results to be exposed in that same order when using async search, as well as optimizations built on top of such behaviour (#51852).

For fields with points we call `getMinPackedValue` and `getMaxPackedValue`, while for keyword fields we call `Terms#getMin` and `Terms#getMax`. Elasticsearch uses `FilterTerms` implementations to cancel queries as well as to track field usage. Such filter implementations should delegate their `getMin` and `getMax` calls to the wrapped `Terms` instance, which will leverage info from the block tree that caches min and max, otherwise they are always going to be retrieved from the index, which does I/O and slows the can_match phase down.

… and geonames tracks (#357)

We recently found a regression that affected searches sorted by a keyword field (elastic/elasticsearch#92026).

Given that we had no benchmarks for sorting by keyword, this commit adds the relevant operations to the http-logs and geonames tracks. We will want to also add similar challenges to the many-shards benchmarks, as the regressions we found can be seen with more than a couple of shards. This commit adds also specific challenges to verify the effect of elastic/elasticsearch#51852 when a search is sorted by numeric or timestamp.