I am also looking out for same feature in Solr and very keen to know whether
it supports this feature of tree faceting... Or we are forced to index in
tree faceting format....like

1/2/3/4
1/2/3
1/2
1

In-case of multilevel faceting it will give only 2 level tree facet is what
i found..

If i give query as : country India and state Karnataka and city
bangalore...All what i want is a facet count  1) for condition above. 2) The
number of states in that Country 3) the number of cities in that state ...

Like => Country: India ,State:Karnataka , City: Bangalore <1>

             State:Karnataka
                      Kerla
                      Tamilnadu
                      Andra Pradesh...and so on....

             City:  Mysore
                      Hubli
                      Mangalore
                      Coorg and so on...


If I am doing
facet=on & facet.field={!ex=State}State & fq={!tag=State}State:Karnataka

All it gives me is Facets on state excluding only that filter query.. But i
was not able to do same on third level ..Like  facet.field= Give me the
counts of  cities also in state Karantaka..
Let me know solution for this...

Regards,
Rajani Maski





On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Eric Grobler <impalah...@googlemail.com>wrote:

> Thank you for the link.
>
> I was not aware of the multifaceting syntax - this will enable me to run 1
> less query on the main page!
>
> However this is not a tree faceting feature.
>
> Thanks
> Eric
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 4:51 PM, SR <r.steve....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps the following article can help:
> >
> http://www.craftyfella.com/2010/01/faceting-and-multifaceting-syntax-in.html
> >
> > -S
> >
> >
> > On Jul 22, 2010, at 5:39 PM, Eric Grobler wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Solr Community
> > >
> > > If I have:
> > > COUNTRY CITY
> > > Germany Berlin
> > > Germany Hamburg
> > > Spain   Madrid
> > >
> > > Can I do faceting like:
> > > Germany
> > >  Berlin
> > >  Hamburg
> > > Spain
> > >  Madrid
> > >
> > > I tried to apply SOLR-792 to the current trunk but it does not seem to
> be
> > > compatible.
> > > Maybe there is a similar feature existing in the latest builds?
> > >
> > > Thanks & Regards
> > > Eric
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to