Hi Upayavira
Thank you for your explanation onthe difference between traditional
grouping and collapsingQParser. I understand more now.
On 6/19/2015 7:11 PM, Upayavira wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015, at 06:20 AM, Derek Poh wrote:
Hi
I read about "collapsingQParser returns the facet count the same as
group.truncate=true" and has this issue with the facet count and the
after filter facet count notthe same.
Using group.facetdoes not has this issue but it's performance is very
badcompared to collapsingQParser.
I trying to understand why collapsingQParser behave this way and will
need to explain to management.
Can someone explain how collapsingQParser calculatethefacet
countscompated to group.facet?
I'm not familiar with group.facet. But to compare traditional grouping
to the collapsingQParser - in traditional grouping, all matching
documents remain in the result set, but they are grouped for output
purposes. However, the collapsingQParser is actually a query filter. It
will reduce the number of matching results. Any faceting that happens
will happen on the filtered results.
I wonder if you can use this syntax to achieve faceting alongside
collapsing:
q=whatever
fq={!collapse tag=collapse}blah
facet.field={!ex=collapse}my_facet_field
This way, you get the benefits of the CollapsingQParserPlugin, with full
faceting on the uncollapsed resultset.
I've no idea how this would perform, but I'd expect it to be better than
the grouping option.
Upayavira
