I thought that field collapsing as already 'ready for prime time', just not yet integrated into the core?
Dennis Gearon Signature Warning ---------------- EARTH has a Right To Life, otherwise we all die. Read 'Hot, Flat, and Crowded' Laugh at http://www.yert.com/film.php --- On Thu, 8/5/10, Lance Norskog <goks...@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Lance Norskog <goks...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: No "group by"? looking for an alternative. > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Date: Thursday, August 5, 2010, 8:17 PM > I can see how one document per model > blows up when you have many > options. But how many models of the shoe do they actually > make? They > can't possibly make 5000, one for every metadat > combination. > > If you go with one document per model, you have to do a > second search > on that product ID to get all of the models. > > Field Collapsing is exactly for the 'many shoes for one > product' > problem, but it is not released, so the second search is > what you > want. > > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Jonathan Rochkind <rochk...@jhu.edu> > wrote: > > Mickael Magniez wrote: > >> > >> Thanks for your response. > >> > >> Unfortunately, I don't think it'll be enough. In > fact, I have many other > >> products than shoes in my index, with many other > facets fields. > >> > >> I simplified my schema : in reality facets are > dynamic fields. > >> > > > > You could change the way you do indexing, so every > product-color-size combo > > is it's own "document". > > > > Document1: > > product: running shoe > > size: 12 > > color: red > > > > Document2: > > product: running shoe > > size: 13 > > color: red > > > > That would let you do the kind of facetting drill-down > you want to do. It > > would of course make other things more complicated. > But it's the only way I > > can think of to let you do the kind of facet > drill-down you want, if I > > understand what you want correctly, which I may not. > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Lance Norskog > goks...@gmail.com >
