Erik,

After some more experiments, I can get it to perform incorrectly using the
sample solr data.

The example query from SOLR-792 ticket:
  
http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*&rows=0&facet=on&facet.field=cat&facet.tree=cat,inStock&wt=json&indent=on

Make a few altertions to the query:

1) swap the tree order - all tree facets are 0
  
http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*&rows=0&facet=on&facet.field=cat&facet.tree=inStock,cat&wt=json&indent=on

2) swap tree order and change facet.field to be the primary( inStock )
  
http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*&rows=0&facet=on&facet.field=inStock&facet.tree=inStock,cat&wt=json&indent=on

Also, can tree faceting work distributed?

enjoy,

-jeremy

On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 05:41:21PM -0700, Erik Hatcher wrote:
> Jeremy,
>
> What's the full request you're making to Solr?
>
> Do you get values when you facet normally on date_id and type?  
> &facet.field=date_id&facet.field=type
>
>       Erik
>
> p.s. this e-mail is not on the list (on a hotel net connection blocking 
> outgoing mail) - feel free to reply to this back on the list though.
>
> On Oct 15, 2008, at 5:29 PM, Jeremy Hinegardner wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm testing out using the Tree Faceting Component (SOLR-792) on top of 
>> Solr 1.3.
>>
>> It looks like it would do exactly what I want, but something is not 
>> working
>> correctly with my schema.  When I use the example schema, it works just 
>> fine,
>> but I swap out the example schema's and example index and then put in my 
>> index
>> and and schema,  tree facet does not work.
>>
>> Both of the fields I want to facet can be faceted individually, but when I 
>> say
>> facet.tree=date_id,type then all of the values are 0.
>>
>> Does anyone have any ideas on where I should start looking ?
>>
>> enjoy,
>>
>> -jeremy
>>
>> -- 
>> ========================================================================
>> Jeremy Hinegardner                              [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

-- 
========================================================================
 Jeremy Hinegardner                              [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Reply via email to