[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2403?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13113375#comment-13113375
 ] 

Dmitry Kan commented on SOLR-2403:
----------------------------------

Peter: In one of the distributed faceting sessions we have found out, that the 
zero facets can be filtered by (undocumented?) facet.zeros parameter. Does 
anything change, if you set it to 0 (filtering out zero-facets)?

> Problem with facet.sort=lex, shards, and facet.mincount
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-2403
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2403
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: search
>    Affects Versions: 4.0
>         Environment: RHEL5, Ubuntu 10.04
>            Reporter: Peter Cline
>
> I tested this on a recent trunk snapshot (2/25), haven't verified with 3.1 or 
> 1.4.1.  I can if necessary and update.
> Solr is not returning the proper number of facet values when sorting 
> alphabetically, using distributed search, and using a facet.mincount that 
> excludes some of the values in the first facet.limit values.
> Easiest explained by example.  Sorting alphabetically, the first 20 values 
> for my "subject_facet" field have few documents.  19 facet values have only 1 
> document associated, and 1 has 2 documents.  There are plenty after that have 
> more than 2.
> {code}
> http://localhost:8082/solr/select?q=*:*&facet=true&facet.field=subject_facet&facet.limit=20&facet.sort=lex&facet.mincount=2
> {code}
> comes back with the expected 20 facet values with >= 2 documents associated.
> If I add a shards parameter that points back to itself, the result is 
> different.
> {code}
> http://localhost:8082/solr/select?q=*:*&facet=true&facet.field=subject_facet&facet.limit=20&facet.sort=lex&facet.mincount=2&shards=localhost:8082/solr
> {code}
> comes back with only 1 facet value: the single value in the first 20 that had 
> more than 1 document.  
> It appears to me that mincount is ignored when doing the original query to 
> the shards, then applied afterwards.
> Let me know if you need any more info.  
> Thanks,
> Peter

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to