What is the section's type where you define these: defaults, appends, or invariants? You did not mention that but it might be important.
Regards, Alex. Personal: http://www.outerthoughts.com/ and @arafalov Solr resources and newsletter: http://www.solr-start.com/ and @solrstart Solr popularizers community: https://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=6713853 On 21 November 2014 11:54, Burke, Brian <bbu...@techtarget.com> wrote: > We’ve run into an issue during local testing of the 4.10.2 release, where if > the search handler config in solrconfig.xml has facet.fields defined, and a > different field is on the request, then the requested facets are included > twice in the response. If the list of default facet fields is removed from > the handler config, no dupes are returned. > > Is this configuration in solrconfig.xml not supported, or incorrect in some > way? > > Here’s an excerpt from the solrconfig.xml (for the default search handler): > > …. > <str name='facet'>true</str> > <str name='facet.field'>typedef</str> > <str name='f.typedef.facet.limit'>15</str> > <str name='facet.field'>subtype</str> > <str name='f.subtype.facet.limit'>15</str> > <str name='facet.mincount'>1</str> > … > > And when requesting facets on another field with this request: > > > Produces this result, with the facets listed twice: > http://ctestserver/solr/core12/select?q=*:*&rows=0&wt=json&indent=true&facet=true&facet.field=primaryId&facet.limit=10 > > > { > "responseHeader":{ > "status":0, > "QTime":19, > "params":{ > "facet":"true", > "indent":"true", > "q":"*:*", > "facet.limit":"10", > "facet.field":"primaryId", > "wt":"json", > "rows":"0"}}, > "response":{"numFound":3365954,"start":0,"docs":[] > }, > "facet_counts":{ > "facet_queries":{}, > "facet_fields":{ > "primaryId":[ > "c7e512f03d300310VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",81047, > "2f4e68c8f24f3310VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",34239, > "cfe3d14b917e1210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",16719, > "0c88cd4fb27e1210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",14179, > "c4e39262b57e1210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",10983, > "98a13bc7f1c96310VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",10504, > "69cb2c4c9c6e1210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",10232, > "435dd953c2772210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",9250, > "23a89ce3f561f110VgnVCM1000009d2916acRCRD",9024, > "f4e6fc42247e1210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",8022], > "primaryId":[ > "c7e512f03d300310VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",81047, > "2f4e68c8f24f3310VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",34239, > "cfe3d14b917e1210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",16719, > "0c88cd4fb27e1210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",14179, > "c4e39262b57e1210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",10983, > "98a13bc7f1c96310VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",10504, > "69cb2c4c9c6e1210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",10232, > "435dd953c2772210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",9250, > "23a89ce3f561f110VgnVCM1000009d2916acRCRD",9024, > "f4e6fc42247e1210VgnVCM1000000d01c80aRCRD",8022]}, > "facet_dates":{}, > "facet_ranges":{}, > "facet_intervals":{}}} > > > Any suggestions on how to eliminate these duplicates would be most > appreciated. > Thanks, > Brian > > >
