Thanks Ufuk for the response. Best, Modassar
On Wed, 23 Aug 2023 at 8:08 PM, ufuk yılmaz <uyil...@vivaldi.net.invalid> wrote: > I don’t exactly remember the mechanism but roughly the main reason behind > is, lets say you wanted the top 10 results. By default solr considers say > ~15 top documents from each shard/replica as candidates for top 10. What if > the 16th result from a couple shards had many documents and would have > superseeded the 15th result if it was considered? This results in an > incorrect top 10 list. And what if something in that top 10 list was on the > 16th place in some replica? Then it won’t be counted towards the end count > and result in an incorrect count. > > When you search about overrequest and overrefine parameters there are > resources which explained that much better than me 😃 those parameters are > there to alleviate this problem. Such as: > > > https://medium.com/@sarkaramrit2/overrequest-and-refine-json-facet-bucket-counts-in-solr-1acfa77cd90c > > -ufuk yilmaz > > Sent from Mail for Windows > > From: Modassar Ather > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 2:01 PM > To: users@solr.apache.org > Subject: Re: Effect of facet.limit on facet count value. > > Thanks for your response. > > The Solr cluster is deployed on 48 shards and all the documents of a group > is on one shard only. > > Can you please help me understand the reason behind this behaviour of > faceting? > > Thanks, > Modassar > > On Wed, 23 Aug 2023 at 3:55 PM, ufuk yılmaz <uyil...@vivaldi.net.invalid> > wrote: > > > I’d suggest to take a look at the overrequest and overrefine parameters, > > especially if running SolrCloud and collection in question has multiple > > shards > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows > > > > From: Modassar Ather > > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 11:36 AM > > To: users@solr.apache.org > > Subject: Effect of facet.limit on facet count value. > > > > Hi, > > > > With an increase and decrease in the value of facet.limit the facet > counts > > are changing. This is happening in grouped faceting. > > > > I noticed when the facet limit is set to -1 or a higher number the > grouped > > facet counts are correct. > > > > Kindly help me understand and resolve this issue to get the correct > grouped > > facet count. > > > > Thanks, > > Modassar > > > > > >
