[Lens] Restructure top values dimension editor

[flash1293]

Remove the slider from "Number of values" field in "Top value" functions (as it is not useful for precision control and potentially confusing as 100 isn't the maximum limit)

Move the "Advanced" buttons to the bottom left of the gray container

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/kibana-app (Team:KibanaApp)

[wylieconlon]

Are you proposing that we would allow users to type any number into the box? We already have an edge case here today, and this change could make it worse. I'm going to open up a new issue about this because it's something we already have a problem with, but maybe you can see if it's worth doing the work at the same time.

#93998

[flash1293]

This is the UI suggested by @MichaelMarcialis

[wylieconlon]

@flash1293 Right, but if we take the current behavior we would still limit the user to a max of 100. Are you proposing increasing the limit or removing it?

[flash1293]

@wylieconlon Good point, I assumed the "raw" number input would be unbounded, but of course that doesn't have to be the case. I think it does make sense because the 100 limit feels pretty arbitrary and we can run into the max buckets error even with this limit (and it's handled already relatively gracefully). @MichaelMarcialis did you intend to remove this limit or did I misunderstand?

[MichaelMarcialis]

@wylieconlon Good point, I assumed the "raw" number input would be unbounded, but of course that doesn't have to be the case. I think it does make sense because the 100 limit feels pretty arbitrary and we can run into the max buckets error even with this limit (and it's handled already relatively gracefully). @MichaelMarcialis did you intend to remove this limit or did I misunderstand?

Interesting. I could swear that in the past, the "number of values" field allowed users to exceed 100, regardless of the fact that the slider only went up to 100. Now however, it seems we do limit user entry to 100 in the "number of values" input. Was this changed recently?

Regardless, my intent to remove the slider was because it's not useful for precision control and I was assuming it was not an accurate representation of the maximum "number of values" (though it is now). My suggestion to remove the slider still stands, due to the precision comment. As to whether we should continue to limit the maximum "number of values", I would defer to you all regarding how that would affect performance. We've been asked to raise the limit, but if removing this limit altogether is a performance concern, then simply applying a higher maximum limit makes sense to me. I'd just say that if we do continue to apply a limit, we should notify users of that in the help text for that input field (once the slider is removed).

[wylieconlon]

@MichaelMarcialis yes, in 7.10 we increased the slider from 20 -> 100 and added the hard limit. #78734

Browser performance is more of a problem than Elasticsearch performance in Lens. We can handle slow queries using the async searches, but slow browser performance can make Lens unusable. We should be careful here.

In absolute terms, there is a hard limit set by Elasticsearch on the cluster settings. It defaults to 65k in recent versions, but it was 10k in older versions- but this is user-configurable, so it could be higher or lower. Lens becomes almost unusable when dealing with this much data.

[flash1293]

In tables, going beyond 100 makes much more sense than in other visualization types. I'm not sure how it would look like, but could we have the default UI going from 1 - 100 with an additional click to allow free input with a warning of some kind that it can cause issues (to make it hard for people to accidentally run into it)? This seems related to the ongoing discussion about allowing smaller intervals for histogram aggregations.

[flash1293]

Based on our discussion I created a separate issue (#95007) on how to guide the user to a proper usage of top values size (and other granularity options which have the same issue). This issue is just about the UI of the dimension editor now (removing slider and introducing advanced section).

As this came up a few times and there are some good reasons to do so, I propose raising the top values size limit to 1000 as a short term solution until we have time to resolve #95007 properly. I realize it's not optimal, but I don't think we can find a better solution in the time limit of 7.13 (due to the complexity involved) and IMHO making it slightly easier to produce expensive queries is much better than limiting the user in this confusing and arbitrary way (which was raised multiple times from users already). Visualize is not limiting the size parameter at all, so we would definitely not do worse than Visualize (and it's not a common complaint there). @VijayDoshi do you think this makes sense?