[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2242?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13692002#comment-13692002
 ] 

Jonathan Rochkind commented on SOLR-2242:
-----------------------------------------

Shawn Heisey:  Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding what you don't understand, 
but, here's what this feature does, at the high level:

You can ask Solr for facet response already. You get, for instance, the first 
10 (or first `facet.limit`) facet values, sorted by your chosen sort criteria. 
You can, already, then choose to page through all the facet values, using 
facet.offset combined with facet.limit. 

You can page through them, but you don't know how long you'll be paging for -- 
at some point your request with a given facet.offset will just stop returning 
results because you've exhausted all the facet values available. But you have 
no way to know when that will be until you get there. There is no way to get 
the total number of facet results available. 

This feature is meant to add that, a way to get in the response the count of 
the total number of unique facet values, the ones you'd be paging through with 
facet.offset. 

Apparently what makes it tricky to implement is the distributed environment?  

Some of the language used in this ticket to refer to the feature is indeed 
confusing IMO. I hope this helps. 
                
> Get distinct count of names for a facet field
> ---------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-2242
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2242
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Response Writers
>    Affects Versions: 4.0-ALPHA
>            Reporter: Bill Bell
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 4.4
>
>         Attachments: SOLR-2242-3x_5_tests.patch, SOLR-2242-3x.patch, 
> SOLR-2242.patch, SOLR-2242.patch, SOLR-2242.patch, 
> SOLR-2242.shard.withtests.patch, SOLR-2242.solr3.1-fix.patch, 
> SOLR-2242.solr3.1.patch, SOLR.2242.solr3.1.patch, SOLR-2242-solr40-3.patch
>
>
> When returning facet.field=<name of field> you will get a list of matches for 
> distinct values. This is normal behavior. This patch tells you how many 
> distinct values you have (# of rows). Use with limit=-1 and mincount=1.
> The feature is called "namedistinct". Here is an example:
> Parameters:
> facet.numTerms or f.<field>.facet.numTerms = true (default is false) - turn 
> on distinct counting of terms
> facet.field - the field to count the terms
> It creates a new section in the facet section...
> http://localhost:8983/solr/select?shards=localhost:8983/solr,localhost:7574/solr&indent=true&q=*:*&facet=true&facet.mincount=1&facet.numTerms=true&facet.limit=-1&facet.field=price
> http://localhost:8983/solr/select?shards=localhost:8983/solr,localhost:7574/solr&indent=true&q=*:*&facet=true&facet.mincount=1&facet.numTerms=false&facet.limit=-1&facet.field=price
> http://localhost:8983/solr/select?shards=localhost:8983/solr,localhost:7574/solr&indent=true&q=*:*&facet=true&facet.mincount=1&facet.numTerms=true&facet.limit=-1&facet.field=price
> This currently only works on facet.field.
> {code}
> <lst name="facet_counts">
> <lst name="facet_queries"/>
> <lst name="facet_fields">...</lst>
> <lst name="facet_numTerms">
> <lst name="localhost:8983/solr/">
> <int name="price">14</int>
> </lst>
> <lst name="localhost:8080/solr/">
> <int name="price">14</int>
> </lst>
> </lst>
> <lst name="facet_dates"/>
> <lst name="facet_ranges"/>
> </lst>
> OR with no sharding-
> <lst name="facet_numTerms">
> <int name="price">14</int>
> </lst>
> {code} 
> Several people use this to get the group.field count (the # of groups).

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to