A 32 bit float has about 7 decimal digits of precision, so your range queries actually do overlap since 4000000000f is exactly the same as 3999999999f
-Yonik On 6/14/07, Kevin Osborn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a large subset (47640) of my total index. Most of them (45335) have a single field, which we will call Field1. Field1 is a sfloat. If my query restricts the resultset to my subset and I do a facet count on Field1, then the number of records returned is 47640. And if I sum up the facet counts, it adds to 45335. So far, so good. But, I really want to do range queries on Field1. So, I use facet.query to split Field1 into 5 ranges. So, &facet.query=Field1%3A%5B4000000000+TO+*%5D &facet.query=Field1%3A%5B3000000000+TO+3999999999.9%5D &facet.query=Field1%3A%5B2000000000+TO+2999999999.9%5D &facet.query=Field1%3A%5B1000000000+TO+1999999999.9%5D &facet.query=Field1%3A%5B*+TO+999999999.9%5D Now, if I sum up the counts, it adds to 54697. I can't find where this number comes from. If I have open-ended ranges on both my high and low end, shouldn't the sum of facet.query equal the sum of a normal facet count? And if a record never has more than one instance of Field1, how can the sum be greater than the total record set? And this problem seems to occur in most (if not all) of my range queries. Is there anything that I am doing wrong here?
